> Deterministic#1 is more likely to return more than1 winner than some other versions, and I don't know if it always meets Monotonicity & ICC. But it doesn't bother me if it violates them only if there are several equally strongest unkept defeats.
I seem to recall that when I looked at "Deterministic#1" a couple of years ago, it violated monotonicity. I don't remember checking for clone independence.
I would be quite interested to learning if D#1 did violate monotonicity or clone independence.
My primary problem with MAM is the need to anything that is random. I would not advocate the use of pseudo-random number generators as I would not trust them to be truly random - I might even think (but could not prove) the lack of true randomness could cause MAM to violate certain, important criteria.
Could use such things as a coin, but those things can be manipulated as well and it could become impractical for a vote consisting of a large number of options.
_______________________________________________ Election-methods mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
