Tiebreaker Need

[David Marsay]

Re:

> Date:          Wed, 26 Aug 1998 13:42:22 -0700
> From:          "Blake Cretney" <bcretney at my-dejanews.com>
> Subject:       Re: Tiebreaker Need

FYI:
A. Gibbard Manipulation of Voting Schemes: A general result,
Econometrica 47, 1973

Gibbard discusses randomly choosing a tied option versus randomly 
choosing a ballot to break the tie. The former rewards 'rich 
parties', in that cloning a candidate increases the chances of one of 
the clones being picked.

An alternative would be to eliminate or duplicate a ballot and re-run 
the base method (e.g., a variant of Condorcet). This could change the 
result completely by changing the result of some pair-wise tie break 
(as in Tideman/Shulze). I'd go with Gibbard.

Suggested new criterion: any tie breaking method should not give a 
result outside the original tie!

--------------------------------------------------
Sorry folks, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.