Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2004 21:22:10 -0800
To: Doreen Dotan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
From: "James Green-Armytage" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

        I may as well point out that there is some controversy on the list about
the merits of approval voting. I happen to be a person who is a bit more
dubious about it than some. One serious drawback that it seems to have is
that it doesn't pass the "majority" or "mutual majority" criterion as
defined below:

majority criterion: If a majority of the voters prefers all of the members
of a given set of candidates over all candidates outside that set, and
they vote sincerely, then the winning candidate should come from that set.

James - Can you elucidate why this should be a required criterion?

        Both approval voting and cardinal ratings fail this criterion, which
makes them strategically problematic as well as generally unfair in some
cases.

What would be an example of such a case? Would such "unfairness" arise with sincere CR, or is this a consequence of strategy?

Ken Johnson



----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to