election-methods@mailman.electorama.com

Technical discussion of election methods

View all threads

MMPO

JR
Janet Robinson
Mon, Sep 12, 2016 12:07 AM

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