Re: [s-d] [s-b] amending: more elections

[Antonio Dolcetta <antonio.dolcetta@xxxxxxxxx>]

shadowfirebird@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
>>> If we want to explore voting systems, how about making a new and REALLY
>>> weird one instead of something tedious and ultimately useless like
>>> condorcet or borda (hard as it is to resist the attraction for something
>>> called "condorcet", that name just wins you over with assonances)
>>>
>> You could use Dodgson's method (but I'm not gonna help you calculate
>> who wins).
> 
> I knew nothing about all this stuff when I started writing the Posts
> proposal, but I quickly fell for Borda; It's very simple, and honestly
> seems to be fairer than first-past-the-post.   Plus, more importantly,
> it's less likely to end up in a tie.

Less likely to end in a tie ?
Just because it's more complicated doesn't mean it's less likely to end
in a tie. If I have to guess, I'd say the chances for a tie are about
the same. I haven't done any math about it though, and a quick 10 minute 
research on google on the matter suggests that actually writing down the 
math is non-trivial

> 
> Anyone who wants to implement Condorcet has my extreme-impressedness
> vote, if they can actually manage to put it into rules in simple
> English in less than 5000 words!
> 

you don't have to put it in English explicitly, you can just say:
voters vote by ranking the candidates from their most favorite to their 
least favorite.
candidate X has a pairwise victory over candidate Y if more voters rank 
X over Y than Y over X.
the winner of the election is the candidate that pairwise beats all 
other candidates (if such a candidate exists)

done


_______________________________________________
spoon-discuss mailing list
spoon-discuss@xxxxxxxxx
http://lists.ellipsis.cx/mailman/listinfo/spoon-discuss