User:BetterVotingAdvocacy/Self-referential Smith-efficient Condorcet method: Difference between revisions
User:BetterVotingAdvocacy/Self-referential Smith-efficient Condorcet method (view source)
Revision as of 23:45, 24 March 2020
, 4 years ago→Notes
No edit summary |
(→Notes) |
||
Line 13:
[[Pairwise counting]] can generally be adapted in some way (not necessarily using majority rule) to determine if there is an SR-Condorcet winner or SR-Smith set in a particular voting method.
In some sense, SR methods are the natural result of making [[Majority rule|majority rule]] and [[utilitarianism]] maximally satisfy [[Independence of irrelevant alternatives|Independence of irrelevant alternative]]<nowiki/>s. Indeed, one could define SR methods with reference to 3-candidste matchups, 4-candidate, etc. With majority rule, since there won't necessarily be a majority or a tie when there are more than 2 candidates, defining this is tricky.
It is possible to fuse Score voting and Condorcet methods by allowing voters to cast either rated or ranked ballots (or submit a rated ballot with the option to request it be counted as either a rated or a ranked ballot; see the [[ballot]] article for how to do this) and then counting those voters who cast rated ballots as having weak preferences in each runoff (i.e. a voter who scored one candidate a 1 and the other a 0.8 would be counted as giving 0.2 votes to help the first candidate pairwise beat the latter) and counting the voters who cast ranked ballots as having maximally strong preferences in each runoff (i.e. the previously mentioned voter would be counted as giving 1 vote to help the first candidate pairwise beat the latter).
| |||