[EM] Condorcet corresponding to some variant of IRV?

[Dave Ketchum]

On Mon, 26 May 2003 09:01:08 +0200 Bjarke Dahl Ebert wrote:

>>On Mon, 26 May 2003 00:37:20 +0200 Bjarke Dahl Ebert wrote:
>>
>> > Here's an idea:
>> >
>> > If you modify IRV to not cancel first votes when progressing to
>>
> secondary
> 
>> > votes, would that method find the Condorcet Winner?
>>
>>
>>BIG question is:  WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO?
>>       Where can you find any happiness by, supposedly, doing IRV, but
>>sometimes picking a different winner than IRV would?
>>
> 
> I'm not at all trying to find a better method than Condorcet - at best an
> alternative characterization of the Condorcet Winner.
> I think it would be an interesting theoretical result, if it could be proved
> that the CW is also the winner of some modified IRV. (That could also make
> some people better accept Condorcet)


Since the heart of:
      IRV is to discard parts of what the voters said.
      Condorcet is to understand the meaning of ALL that the voters said.

Seems unrealistic that anything close enough to IRV to deserve that label 
could dependably find the CW.

> 
> Even if it doesn't always produce the CW, an election method could be
> "theoretically interesting" - at least for comparison with other methods.
> That's not the same as saying that it is a good method :)
> 
> 
> Bjarke

-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    http://www.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
   Dave Ketchum    108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708    607-687-5026
              Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                    If you want peace, work for justice.