[EM] To Demorep, re: Monotonicity
nkklrp at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 14 21:39:37 PST 2002
Prof. Amy in his recent book has this to say in regard to possible
nonmonotonic results using IRV--
While it is clear that nonmontonicity can theoretically occur in an IRV
election, most experts believe that the conditions required for this paradox
to occur are so special that it would be an extremely rare occurrence.*
The estimate that I ran across was that it those situations would exist in
5% of elections. But IRVie Doug is missing the point. Even if it only
happens 5% of
the time, do we really want a voting system that, without a doubt, will
respond oppositely to a voter changing his intention about how to vote, due,
to new information that's become available.
Brams published an example that shows that the following scenario is
As the election draws near, a certain candidate is going to lose, based on
intend to vote. If you want something more concrete, let's say that the
polls show that
he's going to lose.
But then his Nazi past is made public, and some people who'd previously
in 1st place move him to last place. Because those people moved him from 1st
place, he wins.
He wins because people found out that he was a Nazi, and didn't want him.
How democratic is that? How democratic is a method that could act in that
Complain/ explain to Prof Amy and not me.
No, it would serve no purpose to write to Amy. But you posted it, and I'm
what you posted.
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com
More information about the Election-Methods