Chris, This is what you are now claiming is a "fairness" condition:
... that to be fair, the winner of an election must not change with the introduction of a new nonwinning candidate, even if the voters change their votes for the prior (old) candidates. As a voter, I would object to this "fairness" condition that requires any different vote I cast after changing my mind about which candidates to "approve" should not count towards who wins the election contest. In fact, I would oppose any voting method which did "not" violate Chris' new condition that even when voters change their votes, the winner should stay the same. As his example shows, he changes the voters' votes as follows: 65 A 35 B to 40 AB 25 A 35 B Yet Chris expects the same candidate A to win in the second example, where B win.s instead So Chris's new "fairness" condition does not even require the introduction of any third candidate, it just requires that the winner of the election stay the same even if voters change their votes for the same candidates. I.e. In short, "the actual votes which voters cast should not count towards who wins" is Chris' new fairness condition, which I hope that every voting system will violate Chris' version of the IIA "fairness" condition. Cheers, Kathy Cheers, Kathy ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
