Anonymous user
Talk:Method evaluation poll 2005: Difference between revisions
→Rating methods
imported>James Green-Armytage No edit summary |
imported>KVenzke |
||
Line 11:
:Yes, I noticed that; it was the only way I could understand your giving approval weighted pairwise a higher score than cardinal weighted pairwise, when AWP is just a limited version of CWP. I don't know if salability is part of your issue with CR, but remember that this poll deals with functional merit rather than salability. Actually, I think that it is more intuitive and easy for most voters to rate candidates on a 0-100 scale than to rank them with an approval cutoff. I suspect that many voters wouldn't understand the approval cutoff, and hence wouldn't use it. Just my opinion. [[User:James Green-Armytage|James Green-Armytage]] 15:20, 16 Jun 2005 (PDT)
::I am not considering salability, unless in that you include considerations of whether voters will be able to sensibly use the method. I think approval cutoffs and 0-100 rating are both likely to disappoint in this respect. I consider 0-100 even worse unless it's shown that the optimal strategy is not necessarily approval strategy. [[User:KVenzke|Kevin Venzke]] 15:49, 16 Jun 2005 (PDT)
| |||