Mutual Majorities in Score
-
The simplest, best way to minimally change score while protecting chicken-resistance would be some kind of Mutual Majority//Score. Balinski and Laraki give a criterion they call "mutual majority for rated ballots". However, I'm not sure that's the "best" way to define mutual majority when working with score voting.
The Balinski and Laraki form of mutual majority assumes the amount of support for a solid coalition is determined by the raw number of voters who rate X & Y above a certain threshold. Score is generally based on measuring the total amount of support from voters, including strength of support. What if we tried defining "mutual majority" in terms of total support?
Mentioning @jameson-quinn on this.
-
@lime you could also have a persistence diagram that shows the support level of each candidate at every possible cutoff. This produces “score proportion” profiles that indicate the fraction of voters who score each candidate at least a given score. It’s possible to define a dynamic threshold or even an integral across all thresholds.