Hi, On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 7:01 PM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel < ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org> wrote:
> > On Nov 29, 2023, at 3:14 PM, Michael Niedermayer <mich...@niedermayer.cc> > wrote: > > > > If you give Jerry a weight of 10 and give Tom a weight of 9, that means > > you prefer Jerry over Tom because 10 > 9 > > If you give Spike a weight of 20 that would mean you not only prefer > Spike > > over Tom OR Jerry but also over Tom AND Jerry. Because 20 > 10 + 9 > > > > OTOH if you give Spike a weight of 18 that would mean you prefer Spike > over > > Tom OR Jerry but you prefer Tom AND Jerry over Spike. > > Because: 9 < 10 < 18 < 9 + 10 > > Tom < Jerry < Spike < Tom and Jerry > > Is this last example the kind of preference that people are likely to want > to express in practice? It seems much harder to reason about and much more > likely to lead to mistakes. > > Given a list of say 7 candidates running for 5 positions that's 21 > possible combinations and in theory weights would have to be assigned such > that the sum for each one of those 21 combinations is correctly ranked by > order of preference. > > I think the simplicity of the simpler ranked choice voting might outweigh > the benefit of expressing complex preferences with the sum of weights. > Does ranked voting allow expressing equal weight to multiple candidates? For example, I prefer Jerry and Tom equally, but I prefer either one over Spike. Ronald _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-requ...@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".
