YES! That's what I didn't have the right words to say. ICC is a subset of IIA is what I meant by "ICC is a weaker formulation of IIA". Something can satisfy ICC but not satisfy IIA.
The original question was how to define the word "spoiler", and I've come to the conclusion that it cannot be used at all without some qualification. An "IRV-spoiler" might be a clone or it might be an IA, and it can be one without being both. > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > ] On Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 2004 5:02 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Irrelevant Vs. Clone (was RE: [EM] IRV in San Francisco) > > In a method that mistreats clones, a clone is an "irrelevant > alternative". > Dropping a non-winning clone, allowing the other non-winning > clone to win, > violates the desired independence of irrelevant alternatives. > > Thus, everything that violates the clone criterion, violates > independence > of irrelevant alternatives. I think that makes ICC a subset of IIA. > > Brian Olson > http://bolson.org/ > ---- > Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em > for list info > ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
