Re: [OVC-discuss] Ranked Choice Math

From: Dylan Hirsch-Shell <dylanhs_at_gmail_dot_com>
Date: Fri Aug 08 2008 - 04:42:10 CDT

See also:

On Fri, Aug 8, 2008 at 12:08 AM, Dylan Hirsch-Shell <>wrote:

> On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Charlie Strauss <>wrote:
>> Range voting is not practical (unless the range is zero to 4) on a
>> system with 3 read heads. However, Range voting is a very intriguing
>> method of voting worthy of more study. it might possibly be optimal
>> by many criteria, but I wont' quite sign off on that till I (or
>> someone else) looks at it's game theoretic strategies more
>> carefully. It does appear that the "range" tend to collapse towards
>> approval voting when one votes strategically rather than ranking ones
>> "true" rating of the candidates.
> Sorry for dredging up this ancient topic, but is this the study of the game
> theoretic optimality of various voting systems you were hoping someone might
> do?:
> (Punchline: Range voting was the best (had lowest Bayesian regret, up to
> statistically insignificant noise) with either honest voters, or with
> strategic voters.)
> Anyway, the folks at the Center for Range Voting (CRV;
> also claim that range voting *can* be implemented on *all* current voting
> machines without much pain:
> Of course, having a voting machine like OVC's that could be relatively
> easily tailored to range voting would be even better.

OVC-discuss mailing list
By sending email to the OVC-discuss list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
Received on Sun Aug 31 23:17:03 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sun Aug 31 2008 - 23:17:18 CDT