Resoluteness? (was Re: [EM] river, ROACC (terminolgy, again))

[Steve Eppley]

James G-A wrote:
> seppley at alumni.caltech.edu writes:
>> Aren't all the voting methods we've been promoting 
>> both anonymous and neutral?  Doesn't that mean
>> none of them are entirely non-random?
>>
>>   50%:  A > B
>>   50%:  B > A
> 
> 	Actually, I might prefer voting methods which report 
> a tie in this situation, and do not chose between A 
> and B. Hence there is no random element.

I don't believe the public will be willing to discard
the resoluteness (a.k.a. "single-winner") criterion.

--Steve