[EM] Other criteriion for reference method?

MIKE OSSIPOFF nkklrp at hotmail.com
Wed Jan 9 20:15:54 PST 2002

Because I still don't fully understand the Monotonicity definition self 
reference problem,
and the extent to which it limits Monotonicity definitions, I'm printing 
that letter out, to
study the matter further. But it's occurred to me that the Participation 
Criterion might
be a better test of a reference method than the Consistency Criterion is.

Participation is so similar to Monotonicity that people have asked me what 
the difference
is between those 2 criteria.

If I understand Participation, here's a wording of its definition:


Adding to the count some ballots that vote Smith over Jones should never 
the winner from Smith to Jones.

[end of definition]

Someone could say "identical ballots" instead of "ballots", but Plurality, 
Approval, CR,
& some other methods pass without that addition, and it seems to 
unnecessarily weaken
the criterion.

Of course one important difference between Participation & Monotonicity is 
Participation is much briefer & simpler to define.

All the methods that occur to me now that pass Participation are methods 
that are
considered to pass Monotonicity, but the reverse isn't true.

Consistency too is defined in terms of actual votes, isn't it? Is this 

If an election region is divided into subregions, and a regionwide election 
is held,
but we also count in each subregion, to determine who'd win if only the 
ballots were counted, then if a certain candidate wins in each subregion, 
s/he should
also win in the overall region, counting all the ballots.

Mike Ossipoff

Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list