[EM] Re: IRV vs Plurality

[Kevin Venzke]

 --- Alex Small <asmall at physics.ucsb.edu> a écrit : 
> Adam Tarr said:
> > While MCA as it is typically presented does fail this criteria
> > (universality?), there's no reason you couldn't implement MCA with 4, or
> > 5,  or 1000 slots.  The candidate with the largest a first place
> > majority  wins.  If no candidate has a majority of first place votes,
> > then the  candidate with the largest majority of first and second place
> > votes  wins.  Repeat until you find a majority, or reach the last rank
> > (at which  point you elect the candidate on the most ballots).  

Although this would permit MCA to pass Chris' strict rankings criteria,
I would like to say again that I think it is inadvisable for MCA to be extended
beyond 3 ranks, for strategy reasons.  You would have to guess the stage at
which various candidates might achieve a majority.

> > This
> > sort of makes MCA  into a cross between Bucklin and approval - Bucklin
> > with equal rankings  allowed.

...and empty ranks, and (consequently) a fixed number of ranks.

And Alex said:
> Maybe we should just call MCA "Generalized Bucklin."

I'm not sure what "generalized" implies...?

Kevin Venzke
stepjak at yahoo.fr


___________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français !
Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com