On 4/13/12 3:11 PM, ⸘Ŭalabio‽ wrote:
¡Hello!
¿How fare you?
we're good.
I have had interactions with people on this list hating rated ballots.
I have a question for them:
and my question for you is: how high should a voter rate his/her
contingency choice? he/she does not want to harm their favorite
candidate (that would indicate rating the 2nd choice with 0) and he/she
does not want to help their last choice (which would suggest ranking the
2nd choice higher).
"Oh me, oh my, oh me, oh my! What to do, what to do!..."
If the ballot would allow both ratings and rankings, ¿would that be
acceptable?
sounds simple. i'm sure the electorate or the legislature will go for that.
it's also important to have a consistent rule that applies to every
voter. while every voter has a choice of ranking vs. rating, it's not
particularly consistent. it's consistent regarding the *choice* but the
actually quantitative measure is not
The ballot could allow ranking or ratings with equal rankings or ratings
allowed. The rankings would then be converted to ratings like thus:
-1:
-99
-2:
-50
-3:
-33
-4:
-25
-5:
-20
-6:
-17
-7:
-14
-8:
-12
-9:
11
0:
00
+9:
+11
+8:
+12
+7:
+14
+6:
+17
+5:
+20
+4:
+25
+3:
+33
+2:
+50
+1:
+99
¿Would this be acceptable?
as acceptable as Borda.
you think that Borda count is a good idea?
it's just a mapping and is, whatever you call it, is a Score ballot.
¡Peace!
and also to you.
bestest,
--
r b-j r...@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
--
r b-j r...@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
