James Green-Armytage wrote:
>
>> That's why we want an election method that can find the compromise choice that serves 60% of the people when we might otherwise get some faction's 40% or 41% choice.
>
>
>
> Of course, majoritarian methods like Condorcet can't guarantee 60%, or
> anything over 50.00001%. But anyway, I agree with you that the
> probabilistic "timeshare" approach is not a good one for serious public
> offices (mayor, president, etc.) or decisions.
It might be reasonable for some offices, especially when the office carries limited power (e.g. "weak mayor" cities).
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
