James Green-Armytage James_Green-Armytage-at-antioch-college.edu
|EMlist| wrote:
Russ, you write:
Let me explain how I intuitively think about clones. Forget the formal
definition and just think of clones as being perfectly identical to each
other.
Even though it strikes some people as counter-intuitive, the formal
definition is already well-established. If you define another criterion
with a different definition but the same name ("independence of clones"),
it will be a source of confusion. (Likewise, if you use the term "clones"
in the context of voting theory to refer to something other than what Nic
Tideman defined as a clone, it will be a source of confusion.)
If you'd like to define a new criterion along the lines you describe,
please give it a new name to avoid confusion.
You're right, James. I wouldn't want to confuse the general public by
using the word "clone" in a manner consistent with its general usage.
Let's instead perpetuate a misnomer into perpetuity so we can rehash it
every time the subject comes up.
--Russ
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
