Jobst--
Oh shit.
Why can't you send me an erroneous criticism of my criteria, like everyone
else? :-)
I've gotten so used to erroneous criticisms, that I was sure that yours must
be one, but of course it wasn't.
Maybe the best solution is to just say that my criteria only apply if
preferences are transitive.
That's my best immediate answer.
You might suggest changing my definition of sincere voting, but it's what
works with my criteria.
Well, it isn't really a problem though. A valid criticism, but not a
problem, and not a serious fault of my criteria or sincerity definition:
Say you propose a method, and, for that method and one of my criteria, I
write a failure example with transitive preferences. Your method fails the
criterion, because it was possible to contrive an example in which it fails.
The fact that my criteria that stipulate sincere voting don't applly to
examples with intransitive preferences doesn't mean that I can't supply a
failure example for your method.
If you write an example with intransitive preferences, then if a criterion
of mine stipulates sincerity, that just means that your example isn't one
that tests the method by my criterion.
No problem.
Yes, as you said, that voter with intransitive preferences has no way of
voting sincerely, as I define voting sincerely. But, for one thing, my
sincerity definition is only for use with my criteria, not for evaluation of
voters and their motivations. For another thing, that voter shouldn't
entirely blame my definition. Surely she would have to admit that she
contributed at least partly to the definition-mismatch by having
intransitive preferences.
Mike Ossipoff
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
