Selecting Projects,选择项目，
Voting Options投票选项

The Loring Allocation Rule (LAR) makes comparison of results routine by taking a vote to pick the final set of winning projects from 4 or 5 sets.该罗林分配细则 （拉尔）作出比较，结果例行采取投票选择最后一盘的获奖项目由4或5台。

Unequal Voters 不平等的选民

Two of a Kind 两个一类

The solution is simple if there is a consensus that 2 items are of a kind and if the tally funds both.  Count those who contributed to both while ranking A over B plus those who contributed only to A .  Subtract from that number those who contributed to both while ranking B over A plus those who contributed only to B .  Eliminate the item that had fewer supporters, then run the tally again.解决的办法很简单，如果有一个共识，就是2个项目的一种，如果都符合基金。计数那些谁促成双方虽然排名比乙甲加上谁只到 。减去从这个数字是谁作出了贡献而排名乙双方在加上那些谁只到 B 。消除的项目较少的支持者，然后运行计数一次。

The solution is harder when there is no consensus.解决办法是困难的时候还没有达成共识。

Conditional items let voters enter grades 有条件的项目让选民进入等级 for A without B , B without A , A with B funded ,  and finally B with A funded .  The tally initially uses the votes for A without B ,  and B without A .  If 1 or both win, the tally uses the corresponding votes, A with B ,  or B with A or both. 一无B ，乙没有 ， 甲与B的资金 ，并最终B与一个有资金来源 。计数最初使用的选票，以无B ， 和 B 。如1或双赢，计数使用相应的票， A与B或B 与 A或两者兼而有之。

Do to what economists call "decreasing returns to cost", the scores for A with B funded are probably lower than those for A without B .  So if A wins and later B wins, the second winner may decrease scores for the first winner.  In fact the first may lose based on the scores for A with B funded .  That is the proper result.做经济学家所谓的“成本收益递减”的分数为A与B资助可能低于一无B 。因此， 如果获胜，后来乙胜，第二赢家可能会降低分数第一赢家。在事实上，第一个可能会失去基于分数为 A 与B的资金 。这是正确的结果。

Conditional items make the ballot longer and more difficult.  So an interest group improves its chances for efficient funding by agreeing on one proposal before voting.有条件的项目进行投票时间更长，更困难。因此，一个利益集团的机会提高其效率的资金商定一项提案进行表决之前。

Other notes on voting: 其他说明投票 ：

A voter's goal is the same as a shopper's: get the maximum happiness out of every dollar.  So a $10 item must give 10 times the happiness in a $1 item to earn the same grade.  That $1 item might be less beneficial than the $10 item.  But if the $10 item does not give 10 times more benefit, its grade should be lower.选民的目标是一样的购物者的：获得最大的幸福，每美元。因此，美元的10个项目必须给予10倍的幸福美元的1个项目获得同一等级。美元的1个项目可能不太利于美元，比10个项目。但是，如果10美元的项目不给予10倍以上受益，其品位也应当低一些。

This is very important to voters.  It might be hard for them to keep in mind while grading items.  If the voters don't think of grades this way consistently, then the data won't produce pleasing results through any tally rule.这是非常重要的选民。这可能是他们很难记住，而等级的物品。如果选民不认为这样的等级一致，那么，数据将不会产生任何结果令人高兴统计规则。

(Voters could score the benefit of each item as a whole.  Scores can be divided by costs to calculate benefit/cost; and those can be graded.) （选民可以评分的利益，每个项目作为一个整体。得分可以除以费用计算效益/费用;和那些可以分级。 ）

A voting rule might let voters give each item two grades : the first says, "how important it is to the community."  The second says, "how important it is to me."  Most economists argue that the social or collective utility of an item is the sum of its utilities to individuals.  But many voters feel that is false.  The first column of scores might be used for a Condorcet Allocation tally; then the second column of scores used for MMV.具有投票权的规则可能让选民给予每个项目两个等级 ：第一个说： “是多么重要的社会。 ”第二个说， “是多么重要了我。 ”大多数经济学家认为，社会或集体的效用项目的总和其公用事业个人。但是，许多选民认为是虚假的。第一栏的分数可能被用于分配统计孔，然后在第二栏的分数用于蓝牙影音娱乐通MMV 。

This probably increases incentives for strategic voting: free riding and putting personal needs in both columns.  Of course, personal needs might be the sole consideration for voters when limited to giving a single grade.  Whether the ballot asks for 1 or 2 grades for each item, the selfish voter is more likely to win what he wants for himself.这可能增加奖励战略表决：免费搭车，把个人需要在这两个列。当然，个人的需要可能是唯一的考虑选民时限于提供一个单一的等级。是否投票要求1或2级的每个项目，自私的选民更可能赢得什么，他希望为自己。

Protect Higher Choices 保护高级选择

MMV is less clear.  It can give some weight to second and third choices, and that weight could save a lower choice from elimination while the favorite falls.蓝牙影音娱乐通MMV是不太清楚。它可以提供一些体重第二次和第三次的选择，而且可以节省重量较低选择从消除，而最喜爱的瀑布。

A voter may be allowed to avoid that.  The rule may say, "Your lower choices will not count if your first choice becomes the candidate for elimination.  Likewise, if your second is threatened with elimination, your votes below that do not count.  So a lower choice would never threaten a higher."选民可被允许，以避免这一点。这一规则可能会说， “你的选择，就不会降低伯爵如果您的第一选择成为候选人消除。同样，如果你的第二个的威胁消除，您的票低于不计。所以较低的选择绝不会威胁到更高。 “

This probably is not needed to motivate sincere ballots since virtually all voters want to help several favorites and few have one overwhelming favorite to protect.  Simulation research may reveal this option's value to the voter who chooses it and to all voters in an interest group.这大概是没有必要激励真诚选票，因为几乎所有的选民希望能帮助一些收藏，很少有一个压倒性的喜爱的保护。仿真研究可以揭示这个选项的值为选民谁选择它和所有选民在一个利益集团。

A steep utility curve is a good compromise between leaving a voter's favorite vulnerable to his votes for lower choices, versus leaving his lower choices with no votes.  A steep curve tends to give much more to his favorite than to lower choices.陡峭的效用曲线是一个很好的折衷离开选民最喜爱的脆弱，他的票数较低的选择，而选择离开较低，没有票。陡峭曲线往往给予更大的努力，他最喜欢的，而不是较低的选择。

Labor Hours 工时

Labor for projects can be allocated by the same ballots and the same formulas as money.  But a ballot often runs out of one resource before the other -- a basic problem in any method of balancing resources for projects.  Surplus money can be banked: held for emergencies or invested for future projects.  But hours idled away this year cannot be worked next year.劳动的项目可以分配在同一选票和同样的公式钱。但选票往往耗尽之前的一个资源的其他-一个基本问题，任何方法的平衡资源的项目。剩余款项可存入：举行紧急的情况下，或为未来的投资项目。但是小时闲置了，今年不能在明年。

A) Create enough of 1 resource to guarantee it will be available to any project which wins a quota of the other resource. a ）建立足够的资源，以保证1将提供给任何项目，赢得了配额的其他资源。

B) Use two ballots and tallies: one for projects which are labor limited, which need little or no money, and another ballot and tally for projects which need money but little or no labor. b ）使用两张选票和统计：一个项目，目前劳动力有限，需要很少或根本没有钱，另一次投票和统计的项目需要钱，但很少或根本没有劳动力。

Strategies 战略

Any value curve that gives a substantial vote to a low priority gives an incentive for vote trading.  A fair trade requires items with near equal budgets.  Each trader reduces his chances for funding his lower priorities which are pushed down the value curve.任何价值曲线，使大量表决低优先给予鼓励投票交易。需要一个公平的贸易项目近平等预算。每个交易商降低其资金的机会，这是较低的优先次序推低的价值曲线。 A variety of value curves are explored in fundRank.htm .各种不同的价值曲线，探讨fundRank.htm 。

Evaluating of sets of winners 评价组冠军

Table 3 compares 2 sets of winners by listing each winner's budget times the number of voters who ranked or graded it as a first or second choice.表3比较2组的冠军得主，列出每个预算倍谁的选民人数排名或分级它作为第一或第二选择。