Talk:Asset voting: Difference between revisions
→Smith Set: new section
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (→Smith Set: new section) |
||
Line 16:
: "Delegated voting" has lots of meanings, though, including Liquid Democracy, SODA, PLACE, etc. Sounds like Homunq moved it there out of desperation, not because anyone actually calls it that.
: Also it's not clear to me why Asset doesn't suffer from center-squeeze effect, since it seems that center candidates with low numbers of votes will be compelled to give them to other candidates nearby. — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 02:49, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
== Smith Set ==
<blockquote> Asset always picks a winner or winner set that is in the Smith Set of negotiators' preferences if the negotiators are given enough time to negotiate</blockquote>
I don't see how this could be true, since it's a single-mark ballot and suffers from vote-splitting/center-squeeze. I find it hard to believe that a candidate who received zero votes would win under Asset, even if they are the Condorcet winner and sole member of the Smith set. — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 17:40, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
| |||