Slashdot Mirror

Multi gig? Schulze, as well as most other Condorcet methods, are summable, which means you only need an amount of space polynomial with regards to the number of candidates to run the election. In Schulze's case, this is an N-by-N matrix that tells you how well a given candidate does against a given other candidate, kind of like round robin sports results. Assuming the election authority publishes the matrix, anybody can check it for himself if he so desires.

You might say that you have no proof that the matrix corresponds to the actual ballots; but you have no proof that the Plurality counts are accurate either, or the Approval counts for that matter. To have proof, you need transparency: each party checking that the count goes well, random recounts, that sort of thing; and you need that no matter if it's Condorcet, Plurality, or Approval.

IRV failing the monotonicity criterion in startlingly plausible ways suggests to me that it flat-out should not be used. Ever. If you want an election with a preferential ballot, by all means use a Condorcet method. If you want a ballot which is MORE strategy-free (read "better") than what we have now, while still being very easy to count, by all means use an approval ballot. Going through the trouble of introducing a preferential ballot and then using a method of counting the ballots which is WORSE than what we have now (instant run-off voting) makes absolutely no sense, though.

I don't usually brag about myself, but when I am insulted like that I feel that I have the right to brag to some extent. I scored in the top 1% of the Graduate Records Exam (GRE), which is taken by engineering graduates to get into graduate school.

• A vapid cheerleading of Case Closed by Gerald Posner, proponent of the lone-assassin theory of the JFK assassination.
  
• An argument disputing the validity of poll results especilly amusing given his reliance on the Washington Post poll maintaining that 63% of the populace is in favor of government surveillance without a court order.
  
• A post in which he derides a former colleague for 'conspiracy theories', and denies accusations by said colleague of gerrymandering content submitted by said colleague, attributing the changes as editing for 'readability' purposes (although he expressly admits 'inadvertently' changing the meaning of the text on occasion, as well as publishing said changes without the original submitter's approval.
  

• The Myth of the Blind Watchmaker
  
• Is Intelligent Design Theory Scientific?
  
  Russ Paielli stands exposed as a right-wing astroturfer, and his posts should be weighed accordingly.
  
  And if you are so smart, I recommend you grow up sometime soon.
  
  Excellent parting shot, Russ. Worthy of Brit Hume.
  

I don't usually brag about myself, but when I am insulted like that I feel that I have the right to brag to some extent. I scored in the top 1% of the Graduate Records Exam (GRE), which is taken by engineering graduates to get into graduate school.

• A vapid cheerleading of Case Closed by Gerald Posner, proponent of the lone-assassin theory of the JFK assassination.
  
• An argument disputing the validity of poll results especilly amusing given his reliance on the Washington Post poll maintaining that 63% of the populace is in favor of government surveillance without a court order.
  
• A post in which he derides a former colleague for 'conspiracy theories', and denies accusations by said colleague of gerrymandering content submitted by said colleague, attributing the changes as editing for 'readability' purposes (although he expressly admits 'inadvertently' changing the meaning of the text on occasion, as well as publishing said changes without the original submitter's approval.
  

• The Myth of the Blind Watchmaker
  
• Is Intelligent Design Theory Scientific?
  
  Russ Paielli stands exposed as a right-wing astroturfer, and his posts should be weighed accordingly.
  
  And if you are so smart, I recommend you grow up sometime soon.
  
  Excellent parting shot, Russ. Worthy of Brit Hume.
  

I don't usually brag about myself, but when I am insulted like that I feel that I have the right to brag to some extent. I scored in the top 1% of the Graduate Records Exam (GRE), which is taken by engineering graduates to get into graduate school.

• A vapid cheerleading of Case Closed by Gerald Posner, proponent of the lone-assassin theory of the JFK assassination.
  
• An argument disputing the validity of poll results especilly amusing given his reliance on the Washington Post poll maintaining that 63% of the populace is in favor of government surveillance without a court order.
  
• A post in which he derides a former colleague for 'conspiracy theories', and denies accusations by said colleague of gerrymandering content submitted by said colleague, attributing the changes as editing for 'readability' purposes (although he expressly admits 'inadvertently' changing the meaning of the text on occasion, as well as publishing said changes without the original submitter's approval.
  

• The Myth of the Blind Watchmaker
  
• Is Intelligent Design Theory Scientific?
  
  Russ Paielli stands exposed as a right-wing astroturfer, and his posts should be weighed accordingly.
  
  And if you are so smart, I recommend you grow up sometime soon.
  
  Excellent parting shot, Russ. Worthy of Brit Hume.
  

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-met hods-electorama.com/2003-July/010350.html (remove slashdot spaces from URL)

It's kinda hard to calculate naively, though shortcuts exist.

That said, I think the positions they take are correct. There are some great theoretical results showing how poorly IRV performs in situations where Condorcet is a stable, rational system. Though there's not many elections that you can analyze to see this "in the wild", a recent Debian project leader election was a great example of where IRV would have been bad.

IRV isn't so bad, but it's also sadly inferior to many other better choices.

Rob

Rob

Rob

The little dig at the end of the CmdrTaco's intro is absolutely correct. There's a pretty big link between voter apathy and the "lesser of two evils" problem. The root cause for the lesser of two evils problem is Duverger's Law, which gives us the two party system. The link between voter apathy and two-party systems is pretty unmistakable, and there's a lot of research on the subject showing it. Read the Wikipedia link above for good starting reference material.

Rob Lanphier
p.s. Visit Electorama! for more on this subject

Yup, there's actually a name for that: Copeland's method. Not nearly as well known as Condorcet's, but is nice in that the tiebreaker is more intuitive to those that are used to sports matchups.

Rob Lanphier
(who is looking for an excuse to plug Electorama, a site about electoral reform)