[EM] Reply to December MMPO comments

[Chris Benham]

Mike,
Those quotes that you  attributed to Gervase Lam were   actually things  
I   wrote.
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014320.html

> To me the price MMPO  (MinMax Pairwise Opposition) pays for strategy
> benefits you describe is just far too high,
> failing as it does (Mutual) Majority and  Clone-Winner. 

I've moderated my view a bit since then. Now I'd probably omit the 
"far". At the time I didn't know that it meets FBC.

> (Also very unattractive to me is that it  combines meeting
> Later-no-harm with failing Later-no-help, and thus having a
> zero-information  random-fill incentive.) 

This is something I've changed my mind about, and would now definitely 
omit the "very". The method that I currently advocate (CDTT,IRV) shares 
this "flaw".


Chris Benham