I got an interesting email from Warren D. Smith a couple of days ago concerning range voting, and I was wondering if anyone had considered it as a Condorcet completion method, kind of like how Borda is used in Black's method. I did a Google search for "condorcet range," ("range voting" "condorcet completion") and a couple of variations but didn't see anything). It seems like it should work pretty well -- even using maximum strategy, range voting is equivalent to Approval, but voters can provide more information on preference rankings than either Approval or Borda would allow.

To make it work right, you'd probably have to do something like the following:
1. Using ordinal rankings, see if there is a Condorcet winner. If there is, this is the overall winner.
2. If there is no Condorcet winner, take the Schwartz set and normalize the range scores in this set for each voter from 0 to 1.
3. Use these scores to fnd the range voting winner.


Basically, you'd be looking at ordinal rankings, and if that was insufficient to find a winner you would use normalized cardinal rankings (that's so a person with a 0-1-4 ranking of the Schwartz set candidates does not have less of a say than the person who used 0-25-100).

Since someone had probably already discovered all of the properties of such a method (it's really hard to come up with something new), if there is a link or a good description of this method the web, just let me know. I'm especially interested in what voting paradoxes come up with it, and comparisons with other Condorcet completion methods. Thanks!

Mike Rouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to