Ok, I give up on poking at this one. While the stated votes may be possible, I do not accept them as being of enough expectability to be useful in comparison among the election systems.
DWK On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 11:13:42 -0400 Warren Smith wrote: >> Then have THE SAME voters vote Range and Condorcet. I would expect >> comparable vote counts - if that does not happen, tell us why. > > > --I *do* use the same voters for Range & Condorcet. In the example answer e, > the range voters elect the best winner YYYY, > and the Condorcet voters elect the worst winner NNNN > (or at least they prefer NNNN over YYYY pairwise by a large margin: 70 to 30). > > >> > --well, the voters were not biased toward Ns - they were biased toward Ys! >> >> Quoting from the web page that I printed 3/23: >> "e.If 70% of the voters each have ideologies consisting of 70% Ns ..." > > > --yes. And that means there are 70%*70%=49% Ns versus 51% Ys, which > yields a Y-favortism, on every single individual issue, by 51% majority. > > The problem is when these issues get AGGLOMERATED into voters with > different stances in an unhappy manner, the result is that Condorcet > and other voting > systems malfunction, whereas range continues to function fine. > > The other systems are not "self consistent" under such aggregation, > that is my whole point. > > To make an analogy, it is like gerrymandering. With gerrymandering, > it is possible > (and common!) for Republicans to win a majority in Congress, despite > the majority of > voters being Democrat and all votes honest. > > With issue-agglomeration, it is possible in many voting systems > for the worst candidate NNNN to win, despite the majority of voters being > pro-Y on every individual issue, and despite 100% honest voting. > Range voting does not exhibit this problem. > > Now it might be that in real life, gerrymandering is common and hence > a serious problem, while > this kind of issue agglomeration is uncommon and hence not a serious problem. > That seems at least plausible, but I do not currently know if it is > true. The examples > I constructed were intended to maximally dramatize the situation - but > the problem > will also arise in less-dramatic forms. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek Dave Ketchum 108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY 13827-1708 607-687-5026 Do to no one what you would not want done to you. If you want peace, work for justice. ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info