[EM] RP vs BeatpathWinner, committee clarification

[Eric Gorr]

At 2:04 PM -0800 3/14/03, Steve Eppley wrote:
>  > Deterministic#1 is more likely to return more than
>>  1 winner than some other versions, and I don't know if
>>  it always meets Monotonicity & ICC. But it doesn't bother
>>  me if it violates them only if there are several equally
>>  strongest unkept defeats.
>
>I seem to recall that when I looked at "Deterministic#1" a couple of
>years ago, it violated monotonicity.  I don't remember checking for
>clone independence.

I would be quite interested to learning if D#1 did violate 
monotonicity or clone independence.

My primary problem with MAM is the need to anything that is random. I 
would not advocate the use of pseudo-random number generators as I 
would not trust them to be truly random - I might even think (but 
could not prove) the lack of true randomness could cause MAM to 
violate certain, important criteria.

Could use such things as a coin, but those things can be manipulated 
as well and it could become impractical for a vote consisting of a 
large number of options.