When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite has changed. Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people so desire. All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote now. So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, because it’s easily do-able. In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze predominant). The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. Alternative # 2: I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if desired. To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, could be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long popularity here. There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. Alternative #3: A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which to start: Voter’s Choice: Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1 or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods require different balloting. e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts a Score-ballot? No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that ballot + method-specification is counted: Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends on the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as approving down to his top-scored candidate. If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing arbitrary or unexpected. It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require any agreement on a method for counting the poll. That’s Alternative #3. If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote on that immediately. …by what method? Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then proceed with it. I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that route, that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with Schulze & Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course it should be. In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my ballot for that vote: If it’s to be counted by Schulze: 1. Alternative #1 2. Alternative #3 3. Alternative #2 (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: Specified method: MinMax(wv) Ranking: 1. Alternative #1 2. Alternative #3 3. Alternative #2

I should add, to my hypothetical Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3 alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people specify Approval: Approval set: {Alternative #1, Alternative #3} On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> wrote: > When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the simplest > & least elaborate poll-proposal. > > I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested > Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite > Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. > > So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. > > But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite > has changed. > > Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as > desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. > > A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. > Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people > so desire. > > All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this > thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on > the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with > only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote > now. > > So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s > voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, > because it’s easily do-able. > > In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, > > …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 > possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze > predominant). > > The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. > > Alternative # 2: > > I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, > requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. > > Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if > desired. > > To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, could > be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. > > What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long > popularity here. > > There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. > > Alternative #3: > > A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s > Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which > to start: > > Voter’s Choice: > > Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; > > & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1 or > more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods > require different balloting. > > e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & > Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if > you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the > option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot > (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. > > What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts a > Score-ballot? > > No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that ballot > + method-specification is counted: > > Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that > you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. > > Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. > > So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends on > the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. > > Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate > “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want > to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. > > So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his > top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as > approving down to his top-scored candidate. > > If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing > arbitrary or unexpected. > > It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require > any agreement on a method for counting the poll. > > That’s Alternative #3. > > If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, > immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote > on that immediately. > > …by what method? > > Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. > > Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 > > I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who > wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then > proceed with it. > > I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that route, > that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with Schulze & > Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course it should > be. > > In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my ballot > for that vote: > > If it’s to be counted by Schulze: > > 1. Alternative #1 > 2. Alternative #3 > 3. Alternative #2 > > (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) > > If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: > > Specified method: MinMax(wv) > > Ranking: > > 1. Alternative #1 > 2. Alternative #3 > 3. Alternative #2 > > > > > >

Typo-correction: Here is what I meant to write in this paragraph. Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method *whose winner* you’re counted as approving down to…in the base-method, which is Approval. On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:32 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> wrote: > I should add, to my hypothetical Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3 > alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people > specify Approval: > > Approval set: > > {Alternative #1, Alternative #3} > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the simplest >> & least elaborate poll-proposal. >> >> I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested >> Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite >> Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >> >> So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. >> >> But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite >> has changed. >> >> Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as >> desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. >> >> A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. >> Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people >> so desire. >> >> All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this >> thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on >> the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with >> only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote >> now. >> >> So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s >> voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, >> because it’s easily do-able. >> >> In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, >> >> …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 >> possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze >> predominant). >> >> The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. >> >> Alternative # 2: >> >> I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, >> requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. >> >> Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if >> desired. >> >> To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, could >> be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. >> >> What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long >> popularity here. >> >> There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. >> >> Alternative #3: >> >> A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s >> Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which >> to start: >> >> Voter’s Choice: >> >> Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; >> >> & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1 >> or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods >> require different balloting. >> >> e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & >> Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if >> you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the >> option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot >> (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. >> >> What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts a >> Score-ballot? >> >> No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that >> ballot + method-specification is counted: >> >> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that >> you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. >> >> Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. >> >> So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends on >> the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. >> >> Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate >> “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want >> to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. >> >> So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his >> top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as >> approving down to his top-scored candidate. >> >> If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing >> arbitrary or unexpected. >> >> It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require >> any agreement on a method for counting the poll. >> >> That’s Alternative #3. >> >> If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, >> immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote >> on that immediately. >> >> …by what method? >> >> Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. >> >> Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 >> >> I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who >> wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then >> proceed with it. >> >> I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that route, >> that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with Schulze & >> Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course it should >> be. >> >> In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my ballot >> for that vote: >> >> If it’s to be counted by Schulze: >> >> 1. Alternative #1 >> 2. Alternative #3 >> 3. Alternative #2 >> >> (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) >> >> If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: >> >> Specified method: MinMax(wv) >> >> Ranking: >> >> 1. Alternative #1 >> 2. Alternative #3 >> 3. Alternative #2 >> >> >> >> >> >>

Oh, another ballot-addition that I forgot to add: In. case anyone specifies STAR, my STAR-ballot: Alternative #1: 5 stars Alternative #2: 0 stars Alternative #3: 5 stars On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:45 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> wrote: > Typo-correction: > > Here is what I meant to write in this paragraph. > > Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method *whose > winner* you’re counted as approving down to…in the base-method, which is > Approval. > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:32 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> I should add, to my hypothetical Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3 >> alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people >> specify Approval: >> >> Approval set: >> >> {Alternative #1, Alternative #3} >> >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the >>> simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. >>> >>> I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested >>> Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite >>> Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >>> >>> So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. >>> >>> But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite >>> has changed. >>> >>> Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as >>> desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. >>> >>> A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. >>> Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people >>> so desire. >>> >>> All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this >>> thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on >>> the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with >>> only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote >>> now. >>> >>> So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s >>> voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, >>> because it’s easily do-able. >>> >>> In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, >>> >>> …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 >>> possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze >>> predominant). >>> >>> The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. >>> >>> Alternative # 2: >>> >>> I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, >>> requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. >>> >>> Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if >>> desired. >>> >>> To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, >>> could be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. >>> >>> What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long >>> popularity here. >>> >>> There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. >>> >>> Alternative #3: >>> >>> A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s >>> Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which >>> to start: >>> >>> Voter’s Choice: >>> >>> Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; >>> >>> & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1 >>> or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods >>> require different balloting. >>> >>> e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & >>> Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if >>> you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the >>> option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot >>> (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. >>> >>> What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts >>> a Score-ballot? >>> >>> No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that >>> ballot + method-specification is counted: >>> >>> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that >>> you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. >>> >>> Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. >>> >>> So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends on >>> the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. >>> >>> Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate >>> “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want >>> to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. >>> >>> So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his >>> top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as >>> approving down to his top-scored candidate. >>> >>> If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing >>> arbitrary or unexpected. >>> >>> It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require >>> any agreement on a method for counting the poll. >>> >>> That’s Alternative #3. >>> >>> If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, >>> immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote >>> on that immediately. >>> >>> …by what method? >>> >>> Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. >>> >>> Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 >>> >>> I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who >>> wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then >>> proceed with it. >>> >>> I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that route, >>> that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with Schulze & >>> Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course it should >>> be. >>> >>> In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my >>> ballot for that vote: >>> >>> If it’s to be counted by Schulze: >>> >>> 1. Alternative #1 >>> 2. Alternative #3 >>> 3. Alternative #2 >>> >>> (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) >>> >>> If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: >>> >>> Specified method: MinMax(wv) >>> >>> Ranking: >>> >>> 1. Alternative #1 >>> 2. Alternative #3 >>> 3. Alternative #2 >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>

The hard thing about Voter’s. Choice is that we would have to do a count for each method that someone specifies. …which could be as many as 23. …all but 4 of which counts would have to be automated, due to the number of methods being voted among. On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 18:26 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> wrote: > Oh, another ballot-addition that I forgot to add: > > In. case anyone specifies STAR, my STAR-ballot: > > Alternative #1: 5 stars > Alternative #2: 0 stars > Alternative #3: 5 stars > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:45 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Typo-correction: >> >> Here is what I meant to write in this paragraph. >> >> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method *whose >> winner* you’re counted as approving down to…in the base-method, which is >> Approval. >> >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:32 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I should add, to my hypothetical Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3 >>> alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people >>> specify Approval: >>> >>> Approval set: >>> >>> {Alternative #1, Alternative #3} >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the >>>> simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. >>>> >>>> I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested >>>> Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite >>>> Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >>>> >>>> So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. >>>> >>>> But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the favorite >>>> has changed. >>>> >>>> Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as >>>> desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. >>>> >>>> A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. >>>> Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people >>>> so desire. >>>> >>>> All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in this >>>> thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a vote on >>>> the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, with >>>> only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a vote >>>> now. >>>> >>>> So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s >>>> voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, >>>> because it’s easily do-able. >>>> >>>> In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, >>>> >>>> …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 >>>> possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze >>>> predominant). >>>> >>>> The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. >>>> >>>> Alternative # 2: >>>> >>>> I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, >>>> requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. >>>> >>>> Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if >>>> desired. >>>> >>>> To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, >>>> could be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. >>>> >>>> What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long >>>> popularity here. >>>> >>>> There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. >>>> >>>> Alternative #3: >>>> >>>> A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call “Voter’s >>>> Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method with which >>>> to start: >>>> >>>> Voter’s Choice: >>>> >>>> Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; >>>> >>>> & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for 1 >>>> or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods >>>> require different balloting. >>>> >>>> e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & >>>> Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if >>>> you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the >>>> option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot >>>> (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. >>>> >>>> What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who posts >>>> a Score-ballot? >>>> >>>> No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that >>>> ballot + method-specification is counted: >>>> >>>> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that >>>> you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. >>>> >>>> Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. >>>> >>>> So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends >>>> on the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. >>>> >>>> Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate >>>> “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want >>>> to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. >>>> >>>> So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his >>>> top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as >>>> approving down to his top-scored candidate. >>>> >>>> If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing >>>> arbitrary or unexpected. >>>> >>>> It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t require >>>> any agreement on a method for counting the poll. >>>> >>>> That’s Alternative #3. >>>> >>>> If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, >>>> immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote >>>> on that immediately. >>>> >>>> …by what method? >>>> >>>> Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. >>>> >>>> Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 >>>> >>>> I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone who >>>> wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then >>>> proceed with it. >>>> >>>> I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that >>>> route, that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with >>>> Schulze & Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course >>>> it should be. >>>> >>>> In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my >>>> ballot for that vote: >>>> >>>> If it’s to be counted by Schulze: >>>> >>>> 1. Alternative #1 >>>> 2. Alternative #3 >>>> 3. Alternative #2 >>>> >>>> (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) >>>> >>>> If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: >>>> >>>> Specified method: MinMax(wv) >>>> >>>> Ranking: >>>> >>>> 1. Alternative #1 >>>> 2. Alternative #3 >>>> 3. Alternative #2 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>

On the other hand, nearly all of those computation-intensive methods elect the CW when there is one…& there usually is one. So probably only the one exhaustive pairwise/count would have to be done. On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 20:06 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> wrote: > The hard thing about Voter’s. Choice is that we would have to do a count > for each method that someone specifies. …which could be as many as 23. > …all but 4 of which counts would have to be automated, due to the number of > methods being voted among. > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 18:26 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Oh, another ballot-addition that I forgot to add: >> >> In. case anyone specifies STAR, my STAR-ballot: >> >> Alternative #1: 5 stars >> Alternative #2: 0 stars >> Alternative #3: 5 stars >> >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:45 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Typo-correction: >>> >>> Here is what I meant to write in this paragraph. >>> >>> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method *whose >>> winner* you’re counted as approving down to…in the base-method, which is >>> Approval. >>> >>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 17:32 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I should add, to my hypothetical Voter’s Choice ballot on those 3 >>>> alternatives, I additionally cast an Approval-ballot, in case some people >>>> specify Approval: >>>> >>>> Approval set: >>>> >>>> {Alternative #1, Alternative #3} >>>> >>>> On Mon, Apr 8, 2024 at 16:58 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the >>>>> simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. >>>>> >>>>> I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I >>>>> suggested Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my >>>>> favorite Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >>>>> >>>>> So I suggested what seem to have been the 2 favorite methods at EM. >>>>> >>>>> But it could be that I was wrong about that, because maybe the >>>>> favorite has changed. >>>>> >>>>> Or maybe, contrary to what I assumed, SIMPLE & STREAMLINED aren’t as >>>>> desired as much as DEMOCRATIC or THOROUGH or ALL-INCLUSIVE. >>>>> >>>>> A few people have suggested different methods for the polling. >>>>> Democratically choosing that poll-parameter is easily achievable if people >>>>> so desire. >>>>> >>>>> All that’s necessary is for a few people to express that wishes in >>>>> this thread. If a few do, then there’d be justification for proposing a >>>>> vote on the polling-method parameter. I hesitate to propose that vote now, >>>>> with only two people having hinted about it—otherwise I’d propose such a >>>>> vote now. >>>>> >>>>> So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the >>>>> poll’s voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express >>>>> that wish, because it’s easily do-able. >>>>> >>>>> In the meantime, let me comment on 2 possibilities for that purpose, >>>>> >>>>> …& a possible (but not yet proposed) 3-alternative vote among those 2 >>>>> possibilities & the default stays quo (Schulze & Approval, with Schulze >>>>> predominant). >>>>> >>>>> The Schulze & Approval status-quo, I’ll call “alternative #1. >>>>> >>>>> Alternative # 2: >>>>> >>>>> I don’t think you’ll like this one, because it takes twice as long, >>>>> requiring 2 polls—the 1st one to choose the method for the 2nd one. >>>>> >>>>> Of course that vote could be conducted immediately… like right now if >>>>> desired. >>>>> >>>>> To save some time, the existing nominations, + any additional ones, >>>>> could be regarded as being for the 1st of those 2 votes. >>>>> >>>>> What method for the 1st vote? I suggest Schulze, due to its long >>>>> popularity here. >>>>> >>>>> There isn’t much more to say about Alternative #2. >>>>> >>>>> Alternative #3: >>>>> >>>>> A long time ago I conducted an EM poll by a method that I call >>>>> “Voter’s Choice”. It doesn’t require any agreement or choice on a method >>>>> with which to start: >>>>> >>>>> Voter’s Choice: >>>>> >>>>> Each voter indicates 1) A method for the poll; >>>>> >>>>> & 2) a ballot for at least that method, & optionally also ballots for >>>>> 1 or more other methods that others might specify, if those other methods >>>>> require different balloting. >>>>> >>>>> e.g. Right now there’s interest in ranked-methods, Approval, & >>>>> Smiih//Score (which requires both a ranking & a Score ballot). So then, if >>>>> you yourself have specified a ranked-method, you post a ranking. …with the >>>>> option of additionally adding an Approval-ballot & maybe a Score-ballot >>>>> (for Smith//Score). But you needn’t add those others unless you want to. >>>>> >>>>> What if the person specifying Smith//Score is the only person who >>>>> posts a Score-ballot? >>>>> >>>>> No problem!! …as will be seen below, in the description of how that >>>>> ballot + method-specification is counted: >>>>> >>>>> Whatever method you’ve specified for the count, that’s the method that >>>>> you’re counted as approving down to. …in the base-method, which is Approval. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, optimally, on should approve (only) down to the CW. >>>>> >>>>> So, the optimality & effectiveness of automated Approval-vote depends >>>>> on the Condorcet-efficiency of your specified-method. >>>>> >>>>> Optionally, you can, instead of specifying a count-method, indicate >>>>> “Manual”, indicating that, instead of the automated Approval-vote, you want >>>>> to have-counted for you the Approval-vote that you have posted. >>>>> >>>>> So, if only one person posts a Score-ballot, then, automatically, his >>>>> top-scored candidate wins the Smith//Score count, & so he is counted as >>>>> approving down to his top-scored candidate. >>>>> >>>>> If that sounds elaborate, it’s all reasonable & logical, with nothing >>>>> arbitrary or unexpected. >>>>> >>>>> It eliminates Alternative #2’s need two elections, & it doesn’t >>>>> require any agreement on a method for counting the poll. >>>>> >>>>> That’s Alternative #3. >>>>> >>>>> If anyone proposes, or indicates preference for, a 3-way vote, >>>>> immediately, among alternatives #1, #2, & #3, then let’s take a quick vote >>>>> on that immediately. >>>>> >>>>> …by what method? >>>>> >>>>> Either Schulze ( because of its long popularity) or by Voter’s Choice. >>>>> >>>>> Whichever one gets more thumbs up…either figuratively or 👍 >>>>> >>>>> I’m not actually proposing that 3-way vote, but I’m inviting anyone >>>>> who wants a democratic choice of polling-method to say so, & we can then >>>>> proceed with it. >>>>> >>>>> I’m agreeable to that if it’s desired. If no one wants to go that >>>>> route, that’s fine too, & that means that you want to just stay with >>>>> Schulze & Approval, as initially proposed. The choice is yours—as of course >>>>> it should be. >>>>> >>>>> In case people prefer a vote among those 3 alternatives, here’s my >>>>> ballot for that vote: >>>>> >>>>> If it’s to be counted by Schulze: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Alternative #1 >>>>> 2. Alternative #3 >>>>> 3. Alternative #2 >>>>> >>>>> (Of course, with 3 candidates, Schulze = MinMax(wv). ) >>>>> >>>>> If it’s to be counted by Voter’s Choice: >>>>> >>>>> Specified method: MinMax(wv) >>>>> >>>>> Ranking: >>>>> >>>>> 1. Alternative #1 >>>>> 2. Alternative #3 >>>>> 3. Alternative #2 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>

On 2024-04-09 01:58, Michael Ossipoff wrote: > When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the > simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. > > I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested > Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite > Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. I don't have any particular opinion, as long as the method is Condorcet and doesn't fail too many criteria. I think it's likely that the cloneproof defeat-droppers will all give the same result. There might even be a CW, which would solve the problem outright. I proposed Ext-Minmax more to reduce the chance of ties, since Schulze has a higher tie rate than other methods and RP breaks ties in a somewhat opaque manner. But again: the EM posts are public so anyone can run whatever voting method they'd like on the ranked ballots and report their results. If ties end up being a real problem, we can deal with it later. I'm not an Approvalist myself, but having an Approval ballot be part of the poll doesn't bother me either. In any case, I don't think it's necessary to complicate matters by having a vote about what voting method to use, or by inventing a meta-voting method. In short, let's keep it simple! -km

I'm intrigued by Alternative #2. Schulze works for me. On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 11:54 AM Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet@t-online.de> wrote: > On 2024-04-09 01:58, Michael Ossipoff wrote: > > When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the > > simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. > > > > I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested > > Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite > > Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. > > I don't have any particular opinion, as long as the method is Condorcet > and doesn't fail too many criteria. I think it's likely that the > cloneproof defeat-droppers will all give the same result. There might > even be a CW, which would solve the problem outright. > > I proposed Ext-Minmax more to reduce the chance of ties, since Schulze > has a higher tie rate than other methods and RP breaks ties in a > somewhat opaque manner. But again: the EM posts are public so anyone can > run whatever voting method they'd like on the ranked ballots and report > their results. If ties end up being a real problem, we can deal with it > later. > > I'm not an Approvalist myself, but having an Approval ballot be part of > the poll doesn't bother me either. In any case, I don't think it's > necessary to complicate matters by having a vote about what voting > method to use, or by inventing a meta-voting method. > > In short, let's keep it simple! > > -km > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list > info >

> > So, if anyone would like for us all to democratically choose the poll’s > voting method, then please either make that proposal, or express that wish, > because it’s easily do-able. > I'd like to suggest using rated ballots (since those can be converted to ranked ballots anyways) and releasing the raw data, for statistical analysis (which can involve methods other than voting algorithms—e.g. I'd like to fit a random-intercepts POLR model to the responses). On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 2:56 AM Michael Garman <michael.garman@rankthevote.us> wrote: > I'm intrigued by Alternative #2. Schulze works for me. > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 11:54 AM Kristofer Munsterhjelm < > km_elmet@t-online.de> wrote: > >> On 2024-04-09 01:58, Michael Ossipoff wrote: >> > When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the >> > simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. >> > >> > I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested >> > Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite >> > Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >> >> I don't have any particular opinion, as long as the method is Condorcet >> and doesn't fail too many criteria. I think it's likely that the >> cloneproof defeat-droppers will all give the same result. There might >> even be a CW, which would solve the problem outright. >> >> I proposed Ext-Minmax more to reduce the chance of ties, since Schulze >> has a higher tie rate than other methods and RP breaks ties in a >> somewhat opaque manner. But again: the EM posts are public so anyone can >> run whatever voting method they'd like on the ranked ballots and report >> their results. If ties end up being a real problem, we can deal with it >> later. >> >> I'm not an Approvalist myself, but having an Approval ballot be part of >> the poll doesn't bother me either. In any case, I don't think it's >> necessary to complicate matters by having a vote about what voting >> method to use, or by inventing a meta-voting method. >> >> In short, let's keep it simple! >> >> -km >> ---- >> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list >> info >> > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list > info >

That’s a like & acceptance for Schulze. Can I also count it as a top-ranking of Schulze? On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 02:56 Michael Garman <michael.garman@rankthevote.us> wrote: > I'm intrigued by Alternative #2. Schulze works for me. > > On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 11:54 AM Kristofer Munsterhjelm < > km_elmet@t-online.de> wrote: > >> On 2024-04-09 01:58, Michael Ossipoff wrote: >> > When proposing this poll, I assumed that people would prefer the >> > simplest & least elaborate poll-proposal. >> > >> > I wasn’t trying to be autocratic or favor my favorites when I suggested >> > Schulze & Approval as the polling-methods. Schulze isn’t my favorite >> > Condorcet anyway, but it’s popular. >> >> I don't have any particular opinion, as long as the method is Condorcet >> and doesn't fail too many criteria. I think it's likely that the >> cloneproof defeat-droppers will all give the same result. There might >> even be a CW, which would solve the problem outright. >> >> I proposed Ext-Minmax more to reduce the chance of ties, since Schulze >> has a higher tie rate than other methods and RP breaks ties in a >> somewhat opaque manner. But again: the EM posts are public so anyone can >> run whatever voting method they'd like on the ranked ballots and report >> their results. If ties end up being a real problem, we can deal with it >> later. >> >> I'm not an Approvalist myself, but having an Approval ballot be part of >> the poll doesn't bother me either. In any case, I don't think it's >> necessary to complicate matters by having a vote about what voting >> method to use, or by inventing a meta-voting method. >> >> In short, let's keep it simple! >> >> -km >> > ---- >> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list >> info >> >