User talk:Psephomancy: Difference between revisions
→Criterion compliance logic: respond to User:BetterVotingAdvocacy
No edit summary |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (→Criterion compliance logic: respond to User:BetterVotingAdvocacy) |
||
Line 90:
: [[mw:Extension:Wikibase_Client]] is also available. Would either of those do what you want? (We can turn on any of the extensions on [[meta:Extensions]] with a few clicks.) — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 19:37, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
:: Quite a lot could be done with such an idea. Consider for example that if a voting method passes the majority criterion and ordinal cloneproofness, it must also pass mutual majority, since a mutual majority's preferred set of candidates are essentially a clone set where if you eliminate all but any one of them, the remaining candidate is the majority's 1st choice, and must win. So an automatic criterion checker could suggest this for voting methods that are proven to pass the first two criteria, for example. [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 19:58, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
::: I don't think those extensions have any automatic capabilities, they would just allow for structured information. I think the automatic part would have to be done by a bot.
:::* https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Bots
:::* http://baskauf.blogspot.com/2019/06/putting-data-into-wikidata-using.html
:::* https://heardlibrary.github.io/digital-scholarship/host/wikidata/bot/
::: Not sure if the amount of work to write a bot counteracts the amount of work to just make changes manually. — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 21:06, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
:: A mutual majority set isn't a clone set. Suppose voters constituting a bare majority rank some permutation of {A,B,C,D} above everybody else, and the remaining 49% voters rank every candidate in a random order. Then {A, B, C, D} is a mutual majority set but not a clone set. So a method of the type "determine what candidates are ranked consecutively in some order by absolutely everybody, replace them with a single candidate, and run FPTP on the result" would be cloneproof and pass majority but would fail mutual majority.
| |||