[EM] Kevin: Your method has truncation strategy
nkklrp at hotmail.com
Sat Jan 3 23:50:01 PST 2004
My remarks were about MinMax (Pairwise Opposition), which elects the
candidate who minimizes the maximum votes against him in any pairwise
contest (be it victory or defeat).
Admittedly I don't know much about offensive strategy for this method.
Burial seems potentially effective. But truncation doesn't appear to
be a useful strategy of any kind in "MMPO."
Defensive truncation is an effective order-reversal deterrent in MMPO, just
as in wv Condorcet ww, and for the same reason. Here's as example. It's my
standard 3-candidate IRV bad-example. In this example everyone's greatest
votes-against is in a defeat, so it's the same as PC:
The A voters order-reverse against B:
Candidates' greatest votes-against (considering all of theiri pairwise
A: 25 + 35 = 60
B: 40 + 35 = 75
C: 40 + 25 = 65
A wins. The A voters' offensive order-reversal has succeeded in stealing the
election for A.
Now the B voters defensively truncate:
Now C's greatest votes-against is reduced. Now it's only 40. C wins.
The A voters have worsened their result by their offensive order-reversal.
The regret attempting it. If the B voters had announced in advance that they
weren't going to rank a 2nd choice, or if there'd been articles and
broadcasts, letters to the editor, or call-in calls recommending that B
voters not rank a 2nd choice, the A voters would know better than to attempt
the order-reversal, and B would win:
Greatest votes against when A voters truncate and B voters do not:
Working moms: Find helpful tips here on managing kids, home, work and
More information about the Election-Methods