Forest Simmons said: > So here's a new method (for three candidate races only): first remove > all of the symmetry, and then the candidate with a majority of first > place votes (on the remaining ballots) is the winner.
The order in which one removes symmetry matters. Canceling out reversal symmetry before rotational symmetry (cycles) gives a different result than Saari's recommended order of rotational, then reversal. I'm not convinced that symmetry is a particularly compelling reason to pick an election method, but Forest has shown that Borda is not the only way to respect symmetry considerations. I'm curious what Saari would say. The existence of a majority candidate in the aftermath of symmetry considerations is a compelling reason to use Forest's method rather than Borda if one cares about symmetry. Saari seems to have a low opinion of the majority criterion, and his attempt to dismiss it in _Basic Geometry of Voting_ is less than satisfactory. Alex ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
