Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the comprom ise when there're only 2 factions

Dear Diego, > In most societies, the "majority dictatorship" is not a major problem because > electors' preferences shift along time, and the 49% can became the > majoritarian faction in the next elections. They may become a majority but often they are not for a long time. As you don't seem to

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise

Dear Abd ul-Rahman, > Jobst, you misread Steve. He said what you intended. He assumed that, > essentially, 20 was much less than 80. Yes, you're probably right. I have clarified what the intended interpretation is, anyway. > There are, I believe, ways to improve the performance of Range, and,

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise when there're only 2 factions]

Original Message Got lost? Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 14:32:55 -0400 On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 09:28:24 -0300 Diego Renato wrote: > 2007/8/22, Jobst Heitzig <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >: > > A common situation: 2 factions & 1 good compromise. > > The goal: M

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise

Hi, Although Jobst may not have intended this assumption, I will continue to make the assumption that the B minority's preference intensity for the compromise C over A is much greater than the A majority's preference intensity for A over C. (I am NOT saying there is a way to measure or compare

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise when there're only 2 factions

On Aug 22, 2007, at 2:55 AM, Jobst Heitzig wrote: > A common situation: 2 factions & 1 good compromise. > > The goal: Make sure the compromise wins. > > The problem: One of the 2 factions has a majority. > > A concrete example: true ratings are >55 voters: A 100, C 80, B 0 >45 voters: B 10

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise

At 03:55 AM 8/24/2007, Jobst Heitzig wrote: >[I wrote:] > > > There are, I believe, ways to improve the performance of Range, and, > > as it happens, the one I've been proposing also makes Range MC > > compliant in the overall method, including a possible runoff. > > Obviously, Range *cannot* be MC

Re: [Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise when there're only 2 factions

At 02:55 AM 8/22/2007, Jobst Heitzig wrote: >A common situation: 2 factions & 1 good compromise. > >The goal: Make sure the compromise wins. > >The problem: One of the 2 factions has a majority. > >A concrete example: true ratings are >55 voters: A 100, C 80, B 0 >45 voters: B 100, C 80, A

Re: [Election-Methods] Elect the Compromise

I can see that I needn't have worried about taking the wind out of anybody sails. Since my message was posted, the challenge has continued to generate a lot of lively discussion and clever ideas, including some that I completely overlooked. The main thing I overlooked was vote trading. So the

Re: [Election-Methods] Elect the Compromise

Hi, It seems to me there might be a use for something like the method that was proposed awhile ago that had to do with offering voters incentives to give sincere ratings. For example, the majority would give the sincere score to their compromise in exchange for their vote having greater effect in