<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" border="0" ><tr><td valign="top" style="font: inherit;"><DIV>Re-sellamat ! </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Points 1° and 2° are independent from each other, as the paradox of Condorcet can already occur with only 3 candidates (while we have a selection of several tens of conlangs...)</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"10" was a pure example; I meant that, if voters are entitled to propose more than one conlang in their ballot, there must be a prealable agreement about how many points gets each conlang ranked in order of preference (think at the "European Song Contest"). </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It is the assignment of points which prevents the paradox of Condorcet from happening. And the assignment of points can be done only by starting from the highest value. </DIV>
<DIV>Ex: Chosen conlang n°1 gets 25 points</DIV>
<DIV> Chosen conlang n°2 gets 20 points</DIV>
<DIV> Chosen conlang n°3 gets 15 points, etc...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thus, we need to know how many conlangs can be proposed in each vote. </DIV>
<DIV>We can also consider that all of the 25 proposed conlangs on the Frath Wiki List (+ 2 contested not taken into account) can be proposed in each vote, which will entail that Chosen Conlang n°1 will get 25 points, n°2 gets 24 points, n°3 23 points, etc...</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Considering the number of auxlangs on the list, it is unlikely that we'll get two (or more ?) conlangs with an equal highest number of votes. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>In any case, I support the idea of a multi-choice vote, for it is the most descriptive of the aspirations of all voters. (For example, we may have completely different opinions on "our" preferred conlang n°1, but we may all be quite near about n°2 or n°3; a multi-vote system will then favour conlangs that interest the biggest number of voters, and not obligatorily "their" conlang n°1). </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Khauris vesper quantims ! </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Olivier</DIV>
<DIV><A href="http://sambahsa.pbworks.com/">http://sambahsa.pbworks.com/</A> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><BR>--- On <B>Sun, 8/16/09, Jim Henry <I><jimhenry1973@gmail.com></I></B> wrote:<BR></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="BORDER-LEFT: rgb(16,16,255) 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px"><BR>From: Jim Henry <jimhenry1973@gmail.com><BR>Subject: Re: [conlang_learners] voting system<BR>To: conlang_learners@conlang.org<BR>Date: Sunday, August 16, 2009, 8:36 AM<BR><BR>
<DIV class=plainMail>2009/8/16 Olivier Simon <<A href="http://us.mc574.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=cafaristeir@yahoo.com" ymailto="mailto:cafaristeir@yahoo.com">cafaristeir@yahoo.com</A>>:<BR><BR>> 1°) First of all, each vote should be reduced to, let's say, 10 conlangs or<BR>> less (Imagine that everyone of us proposes a whole list of all the conlangs<BR>> of the Frath list in order of preference...).<BR><BR>If Philip or the other vote counter agree with you, I don't see a<BR>reason not to put a limit of 10 or so conlangs on the ballot just to<BR>make things easier for the vote-counters. But if the vote counters<BR>don't mind handling some ballots with as many as 25 conlangs on them,<BR>then let's not limit people arbitrarily. In fact, I don't think with<BR>instant-runoff voting that having no limit on the ballot will make the<BR>vote counting significantly more work. It seems to me likely that
the<BR>instant-runoff process will produce a consensus winner in less than<BR>ten rounds of counting, in which case limiting the ballots to 10<BR>conlangs would not have saved the vote-counters much if any work.<BR><BR><BR>> 2°) But the biggest problem may be about the computation of preferences, as<BR>> already put forward by the Marquis de Condorcet:<BR>> <A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_paradox" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_paradox</A><BR><BR>> Thus, the solution may be to limit the number of conlangs in each vote (ex:<BR><BR>I'm aware of the Condorcet paradox. But, though I'm not an expert on<BR>voting systems, and there may be some important aspect I'm<BR>overlooking, I don't see why limiting the number of conlangs on each<BR>person's ballot prevents the paradox from occurring or even makes it<BR>significantly less likely. The Wikipedia page you link gives an<BR>example of the paradox when
there are only three candidates on the<BR>ballot.<BR><BR>> 10); then my choice n°1 will get 10 points, my choice n°2 will get 9<BR>> points, etc...<BR>> A voter is not obliged to propose 10 conlangs; if he only proposes 1<BR>> conlang, then this only choice will get 10 points and that's all.<BR><BR>This variant of range voting doesn't prevent the paradox either, as I<BR>pointed out in an earlier message. It might make it less likely; I'm<BR>not mathematician enough to be sure.<BR><BR>However, as you and perhaps others feel strongly that range voting<BR>would be better than instant-runoff voting, we'd better vote on it...<BR>but voting on what procedure to use for voting can lead to an<BR>infininte regress. And at least two, maybe three variants of range<BR>voting have been proposed, so we have three or four candidates and all<BR>the problems that having more than two candidates causes. For the<BR>list
moderator to say by fiat that we'll use a particular voting<BR>system to decide between IRV and the various kinds of range voting<BR>seems fundamentally wrong.<BR><BR>Would those who prefer range voting to instant-runoff voting please<BR>post saying which variant of it they prefer and why? If those<BR>wanting range voting can come to a consensus among themselves about<BR>which variant to support, we can have a simple majority vote between<BR>instant-runoff and range voting, which would be much simpler and<BR>unambiguously fairer.<BR><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_voting" target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Range_voting</A><BR><BR>-- <BR>Jim Henry<BR><A href="http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/" target=_blank>http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry/</A><BR>_______________________________________________<BR>conlang_learners mailing list<BR><A href="http://us.mc574.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=conlang_learners@conlang.org"
ymailto="mailto:conlang_learners@conlang.org">conlang_learners@conlang.org</A><BR><A href="http://lists.conlang.org/listinfo.cgi/conlang_learners-conlang.org" target=_blank>http://lists.conlang.org/listinfo.cgi/conlang_learners-conlang.org</A><BR></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></td></tr></table><br>