[EM] The responsiveness of Condorcet / Monotonicity

Eric Gorr eric at ericgorr.net
Tue Jul 15 08:53:06 PDT 2003

At 6:21 PM -0400 7/14/03, Dgamble997 at aol.com wrote:
>Monotonicity is undoubtedly a desirable feature of an electoral 
>method. I do however feel that no method can be perfect

Of course, this is what Arrow proved.

>and that other features are more important ( proportional 
>representation of parties, proportional representation of opinion, 
>maximum freedom of  voter choice regarding the individuals who 
>represent you, etc).

Just because other features are more important would not necessarily 
imply that monotonicity would not be a necessary for any good 
single-seat method.

It just seems silly that an election method which could cause B to 
win if a single ballot was changed which moved A above B would be 
considered remotely reasonable.

It is sufficient for me to know that an election method is not 
monotonic in order to remove it from any further consideration for 
single-seat elections. I am uncertain as to how it might apply to 
various PR methods.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list