Warren Smith wrote:
Benham: By this definition Range fails ICC because voters can only express
preferences among clones by not giving maximum possible score to all of
them, thus making it
possible that if a narrow winner is replaced by a set of clones all the
clones lose.
--no. The
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 05:00 PM 1/20/2007, Chris Benham wrote:
By this definition Range fails ICC because voters can only express
preferences among clones by not giving maximum possible score to all of
them, thus making it
possible that if a narrow
At 05:47 AM 1/21/2007, Chris Benham wrote:
Warren Smith wrote:
--no. The definition in the problem statement said slight
preferences among clones.
By slight, I meant, to be formal, infinitesimal.
Right. And how does a voter express an infinitesimal preference
in the Range 0-99 that you
Here is the current CRV web page about this problems and its (lack of) solution
We are speaking about puzzle #5 at
http://www.rangevoting.org/PuzzlePage.html
---
Puzzle #5: Voting systems immune to clones and avoiding favorite-betrayal
Puzzle:
Two desirable properties of a voting system -
Warren Smith wrote:
Here is the current CRV web page about this problems and its (lack of) solution
We are speaking about puzzle #5 at
http://www.rangevoting.org/PuzzlePage.html
---
Puzzle #5: Voting systems immune to clones and avoiding favorite-betrayal
Puzzle:
Two desirable properties
Benham: By this definition Range fails ICC because voters can only express
preferences among clones by not giving maximum possible score to all of
them, thus making it
possible that if a narrow winner is replaced by a set of clones all the
clones lose.
--no. The definition in the problem
At 05:00 PM 1/20/2007, Chris Benham wrote:
By this definition Range fails ICC because voters can only express
preferences among clones by not giving maximum possible score to all of
them, thus making it
possible that if a narrow winner is replaced by a set of clones all the
clones lose.
Now,
