[EM] Re: first wave Condorcet methods for public elections

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

James--

You wrote:

[Regarding the choice of a public Condorcet proposal]

	There are at least three areas of possible divergence:
1. The base method: Minimax (candidate whose worst loss is least bad),
sequential dropping (drop the weakest defeat that's in a cycle until a
candidate is unbeaten) ranked pairs, river, beatpath, Condorcet completed
by another method, approval hybrids, etc.

I reply:

You left out SSD, which, in public elections, where there won't be 
pair-ties, will give the same outcome as BeatpathWinner or CSSD--but whose 
definition is much more naturally and obviously motivated and justified.

You continued:


2. Measures of defeat strength: margins, winning votes, or something else
(cardinal-weighted pairwise (CWP), approval-weighted pairwise (AWP), etc.)

3. Whether to use an anti-strategy measure (candidate withdrawal option
(CWO), CWP, AERLO/ATLO, iterative procedure, etc.)

	Area (1) is not necessarily the most contentious; i.e. most people who
like beatpath like ranked pairs just about as much, and so on. However, I
would not feel especially good about a method that isn't Smith-efficient,
even to start out with. So that cuts out plain minimax as far as I'm
concerned.

I reply:

...but I claim that PC is more meaningfully and practically  compared to 
Plurality & IRV than to the Smith-efficient Condorcet versions.

You continued:

I know that Mike Ossipoff has said that we should all come together
around a winning votes method without an additional anti-strategy measure.

I reply:

Yes, because a Condorcet proposal is simpler if it doesn't include those 
enhancements. And, even without the enhancements, wv Condorcet would still 
be a big improvement over Plurality, IRV, or margins Condorcet, etc.

You continued:

But I'd like to hear what some other people think.
	I'm not even sure what I would recommend, if I was in a position to
recommend something for public elections. I lean towards starting out with
a winning votes version of sequential dropping (or any one of ranked
pairs, beatpath, river, if there isn't an intense need for simplicity)
with a CWO. But that's subject to change, with further discussion.

I reply:

SD would be a fine initial public proposal. Sure, with CWO if CWO does well 
in polls and discussions and conversations.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® 
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963