Comment re: Ranked Pairs (was Re: [EM] MinMax variant)

[Steve Eppley]

Markus Schulze wrote:
> Steve Eppley wrote:
>> That's why I think the best method is a variation of Ranked Pairs
>> which I call Maximize Affirmed Majorities, or MAM.
> 
> In so far as you have always considered Mike Ossipoff to be
> authoritative, I would like to know what you think about the
> fact that he doesn't promote Ranked Pairs anymore at his
> web pages.

Mike Ossipoff has recently written to me that he considers 
MAM to be the best voting method for committees and public 
elections, which means his web pages (maintained by Russ 
Paielli) are merely out of date.  

I agree with Mike that MAM is best, but I don't agree with 
him on everything. (For example, I have a much lower 
opinion of Approval than he has.)   So I don't understand 
what Markus means when he claims I've always considered 
Mike to be "authoritative." (Perhaps Markus should define 
the threshold between authoritative and non-authoritative, 
since he uses the term in an absolutist way.)  I don't 
consider Mike to be more authoritative than Markus or 
myself.  

See www.alumni.caltech.edu/~seppley for the definition of 
MAM and rigorous proofs that it satisfies numerous 
criteria.

-- Steve Eppley