Dear Mike, you wrote (30 Jan 2002): > Plurality, Approval, RB, & RC pass Regularity so defined. CR > fails, because the criterion only talks about order.
Due to Pattanaik and Peleg, the input of a decision scheme is a set of linear orders. So when you define plurality on lone-mark ballots then plurality isn't even a decision scheme. And when you define plurality on ranked ballots then plurality clearly fails Regularity. ****** You wrote (30 Jan 2002): > Maybe they meant: Deleting a loser from the election's ballots > and then recounting those ballots should never decrease the > win-probability of an undeleted candidate. That sounds like > the probabilistic version of my IIAC. Pattanaik and Peleg talk about _adding_ candidates and not about _deleting_ candidates. Markus Schulze
