--- Dave Ketchum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a �crit�: > > (3) Strategy concerns, not necessarily catastrophic but enough to > > complicate voting. For example, under Condorcet voters have the ability > > to dump a low-utility Condorcet winner using a prisoner's dilemma-based > > strategy. Some of us are quick to discount the possibility of voters > > using this type of strategy, but this phenomenon is actually quite > > common. Civil society is built on individuals sacrificing to varying > > degrees for the common good. We willingly forgo certain things without > > expecting immediate compensation, because we expect to be compensated in > > the "big picture". Otherwise we'd all be out looting museums. Or > > common courtesy-- take the simple act of holding a door open for a > > stranger carrying an armload of packages-- it's not like you expect a > > tip. Rather, you expect to reap the benefits of living in a society > > where people hold doors open for strangers with packages. > > Please explain "prisoner's dilemma". I do not remember any suggestion of > such.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/election-methods-list/message/11387 "Some of us are quick to discount..." probably refers in part to me. If people do altruistically truncate, it means that Condorcet is probably less likely to elect a low-utility candidate than if otherwise. But I think Bart's point is that voters shouldn't have to think about this. Kevin Venzke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran�ais ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
