[EM] Re: MMPO, Majority, Condorcet failures (Raynaud versions)
Chris Benham chrisbenham
at bigpond.com
Wed Dec 29 11:33:31 PST 2004
Previous message: [EM]
30 A, 30 A=B, 40 C>B>A example
Next message: [EM]
sprucing up
Messages sor
Gervase,
On Tues.Dec.21 you wrote:
Monotonicity to me seems to be a very fundamental requirement for ranked
election methods. If I had to choose between Clone Independence and
Monotonicity, but not both, then I think I would go for Monotonicity.
Why? I live in Australia, where IRV's fail
> Date: Sun, 19 Dec 2004 18:56:17 +0100 (CET)
> From: Kevin Venzke
> Subject: [EM] MMPO, Majority, Condorcet failures
> 29 B
> 19 A>B
> 9 A>C
> 43 C
>
> CW is C, but the MMPO winner is A.
>
> This scenario is particularly interesting because A is either
> a "weak centrist" candidate, or else someo
