Is there a method that meets CD, and is otherwise as good as Bucklin or MAM?
I'm aware of only one: MMPO.
Meets CD, and otherwise its strategy is like that of MAM.
The only CD method that makes a good unlimited-rankings method.
Embarrassment examples? Sure. Those have no practical importance.
The Plurality Criterion says, in the standard CD example, that A shouldn't win.
Who should?
C? C is the only majority-beaten candidate.
B, because the A voters ranked hir? This isn't Borda, Score or Approval. The A people ranked B over C to defeat C, not to make B beat A.
If the Plurality Criterion says A shouldn't win, the Plurality Criterion is mistaken.
I still consider the CD Approval methods the best. Especially 3-Slot ICT.
But MMPO is the best unlimited rankings method.
Bottom-end strategy? Sure, like that of MAM and Beatpath.
MAM & Bucklin are good too.
Michael Ossipoff
Is there a method that meets CD, and is otherwise as good as Bucklin or MAM?
I'm aware of only one: MMPO.
Meets CD, and otherwise its strategy is like that of MAM.
The only CD method that makes a good unlimited-rankings method.
Embarrassment examples? Sure. Those have no practical importance.
The Plurality Criterion says, in the standard CD example, that A shouldn't win.
Who should?
C? C is the only majority-beaten candidate.
B, because the A voters ranked hir? This isn't Borda, Score or Approval. The A people ranked B over C to defeat C, not to make B beat A.
If the Plurality Criterion says A shouldn't win, the Plurality Criterion is mistaken.
I still consider the CD Approval methods the best. Especially 3-Slot ICT.
But MMPO is the best unlimited rankings method.
Bottom-end strategy? Sure, like that of MAM and Beatpath.
MAM & Bucklin are good too.
Michael Ossipoff