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

Steve Eppley seppley at
Sat Aug 28 16:00:58 PDT 2004

James G-A wrote:
> seppley at 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.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list