Kristofer, Thanks.  Yes I meant STAR. Chris B. > On 2023-09-30 10:07, C.Benham wrote: > >/Rob, />//>>/A question for Chris (anyone who cares to answer), what's the best />>/explanation of pushover at a public URL that seems reasonably > academically />>/rigorous (e.g. something that seems like it would pass muster as a > citation />>/on English Wikipedia)? />//>/Blake Cretney (who used to be active here) had a web-page />/("condorcet.org" I think it was called) />/that is unfortunately now extinct. I regret not copying and storing the />/definitions/explanations that />/were there. / > It's still available on the Internet Archive: > https://web.archive.org/web/20090713234702/http://www.condorcet.org:80/emr/defn.shtml > > The push-over definition says: "The strategy of ranking a weak > alternative higher than one's preferred alternative, which may be useful > in a method that violates monotonicity." > > >/SCORE is similar.  There one can choose between maximising the chance />/that a weak candidate will get in to the final two, />/or weakening your vote for the weak candidate to just below maximum (4 />/instead of 5) so as to help your favourite win the />/top-two pairwise comparison. / > Do you mean STAR? Score voting (Range voting) is monotone. > > -km