[EM] Majority winner set

Markus Schulze schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de
Wed Nov 29 07:05:18 PST 2000

Dear Mike,

you wrote (29 Nov 2000):
> I'm sorry! Because Markus had been repeating things, I must have
> not thoroughly read one of the paragraphs in his most recent posting.
> I thought that I did, but I must have missed that sentence, where
> he stated that the assumption is that the voters report vN-M
> utilities, sincere or not, and then the voting system takes from
> those that information that it needs, and would normally get from
> its own balloting procedure.
> So I take back the statement that Markus didn't explain it.
> But my criticisms of those assumptions mostly still remain valid.
> My answers to some of Markus's statements are different based on
> what I've just noticed, though.
> I still say that it's a contrafactual assumption. Why assume that
> people vote ratings, and that the voting system takes from them
> the information that it needs, when we could instead just say that
> the voting system collects the kind of input that it actually does
> collect when in actual use??

I assume that the voters vote vNM utilities and that the election
method takes from the reported vNM utilities the information it
needs to calculate the winner because I define the criteria in
terms of reported vNM utilities.

Markus Schulze

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list