>James G-A wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >>> Aren't all the voting methods we've been promoting >>> both anonymous and neutral? Doesn't that mean >>> none of them are entirely non-random? >>> >>> 50%: A > B >>> 50%: B > A >> >> Actually, I might prefer voting methods which report >> a tie in this situation, and do not chose between A >> and B. Hence there is no random element. > >I don't believe the public will be willing to discard >the resoluteness (a.k.a. "single-winner") criterion.
There could be an alternate method of election (e.g. House of Representatives) in the case of a tie. Ay any rate, I think it's safe to say that anonymity, neutrality, resoluteness, and determinism are mutually exclusive. You can have any three of the four, I guess. ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info