Forest--
You wrote:
There are two things that bother me about MDDA: (1) The two cases that fall
back on Approval are diametrically opposed: the first case is when every
candidate is majority defeated, and the second case is when several are not
majority defeated. Why not just use Approval no matter how many are
majority defeated?
I reply:
Disqualifying majority-defeated candidates if not everyone is
majority-defeated confers SFC compliance:
If falsification doesn't occur on a scale that changes the outcome, then any
sincere-voting majority is guaranteed that no one whom they all like less
than the CW will win.
That's a lot to guarantee. I admit that that guarantee doesn't mean anything
to the voter who needs FBC's guarantee (and that would include me, in
political elections). But it means that MDDA has guarantees for both
voters--the one who needs FBC, and the one who can benefit from SFC.
Sure, O/D apparently has the advantages that I mentioned in my previous
reply. And probably those advantages are more important than SFC, because I
believe that the need for FBC in political elections is widespread,
reducing the value of SFC in public elections.
The advantages that I mentioned for O/D over MDDA are Approval's simple
acceptable/unacceptable strategy, without power truncation; and it can have
full ranking expressivity without the separate Approval cutoff by which
Deluxe MDDA achieves that.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Dont just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
