Talk:Cardinal voting systems: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (→Recent edits: new section) |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Should always clarify that BR/SUE/VSE are measurements, and that evaluation of methods depends on the assumptions made in the simulations. In other words, distinguish Smith's BR simulations from BR itself, and Quinn's/Merrill's VSE/SUE simulations from VSE/SUE itself. I could run BR simulations with different voter distributions that give different results, for instance. |
Should always clarify that BR/SUE/VSE are measurements, and that evaluation of methods depends on the assumptions made in the simulations. In other words, distinguish Smith's BR simulations from BR itself, and Quinn's/Merrill's VSE/SUE simulations from VSE/SUE itself. I could run BR simulations with different voter distributions that give different results, for instance. |
||
"Simply put, voting in the range [0,1] or [0,100] or even [-42,7] is irrelevant." |
|||
This isn't true in the real world, because of the psychological impact of negative numbers. See https://halshs.archives-ouvertes.fr/halshs-01618039/document etc |
|||
Also I think it's good to use the term "Score voting" for real-world systems with discrete score levels, and "Range voting" for mathematical simulations with real numbers from 0 to 1, as in the references on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_voting#Variants. |
Also I think it's good to use the term "Score voting" for real-world systems with discrete score levels, and "Range voting" for mathematical simulations with real numbers from 0 to 1, as in the references on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardinal_voting#Variants. |
||