Difference between revisions of "Score voting"

Jump to navigation Jump to search
1,221 bytes added ,  1 year ago
no edit summary
m (wording)
Supporters of range voting include [[Warren Smith]], [[Clay Shentrup]], [[Jan Kok]], [[Keith Edmonds]] and [[Steve Gruber]].
== Connection to Condorcet methods ==
Score can be thought of as a [[Condorcet method]] where a voter may only put up to 1 vote (i.e. the maximum number of points allowed) in between any pair of candidates in a [[beatpath]]. That is, a strategic voter whose preference is A>B>C can maximally contribute to A getting more points than B or to B getting more points than C, but not both. A rated ballot A:5 B:4 C:0 with max score of 5 is treated as "A is 1 point better than B, B is 4 points better than C, and A is 5 points better than C", whereas in Condorcet all three [[Pairwise counting|pairwise comparisons]] are treated as "more-preferred candidate is 1 vote i.e. 5 points better than less-preferred candidates." Both Score and Condorcet elect the candidate who can get more points/votes than any other opponent in one-on-one comparisons, though in Condorcet such a candidate may [[Condorcet paradox|not always]] exist.
Score's satisfaction of the above-mentioned property (max of 1 vote of differentiation in a beatpath) is one of the reasons it nominally passes Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives where Condorcet methods don't, as the only time those methods fail ities is when no beats-awl dinner exists.
== References ==
Cookies help us deliver our services. By using our services, you agree to our use of cookies.

Navigation menu