[EM] Chris, DD, 23 March, '05, 0600 GMT

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Chris--

Forgive me if I didn't know that DD meant defeat-dropper due to the fact 
that you'd used the term "defeat-dropper".

And forgive me if I missed your precise and complete defintiion of your 
Defeat-Dropper method.

Would you precisely and completely define your Defeat-Dropper method now?

You quoted a definition of Non-Drastic Defense:

"Non-Drastic Defense", i.e. it
has the property that if more than half  the voters
rank y above x and y now lower than equal-first, then
x can't win.

I reply:

Plurality passes Non-Drastic Defense.

Suppose that "to rank" means " to rank in a rank-balloting system". In that 
case, no one can write a Plurality example that complies with the premise of 
Non-Drastic Defense. That means that no one can write a Plurality NDD 
failure example, and that Plurality passes NDD.

I past the definition here, for use below:

"Non-Drastic Defense", i.e. it
has the property that if more than half  the voters
rank y above x and y now lower than equal-first, then
x can't win.

Or suppose that to rank X over Y is taken to mean to vote X over Y, as I 
define that term.

Then, in Plurality, the only way for a majority to vote Y over X, and to 
vote Y no lower than equal first, would be if that majority voted for Y. 
Gave their one Plurality vote to Y. If they do that, X can't possibly win. 
Not with Y getting votes from a majority.

So, by either assumption about the meaning of ranking, Plurality meets 
Non-Drastic Defense.

So, Chris, what you're saying is that your method meets a criterion that 
Plurality meets.

It seems to me that we discussed your method on EM once, but I don't 
remember how your method did by the defensive strategy criteria.

Maybe if NDD is defined so as to apply only toi rank methods, it would serve 
the purpose of WDSC for comparing rank methods. I like WDSC because it 
applies uniformly to all methods.

As I said, I don't criticize Steve's criteria. But I've recently sometimes 
had them used as examples of something better than the majority defensise 
strategy criteria, or as better wordings that are equivalent to the majority 
defensive strategy criteria. NDD isn't equivalent to WDSC.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/