[EM] SCRRIRVE; my folly

Markus Schulze markus.schulze at alumni.tu-berlin.de
Tue Jan 20 15:53:01 PST 2004

Dear James Green-Armytage,

you wrote (20 Jan 2004):
> Perhaps someone else (Markus?) can tell us why Raynaud isn't
> discussed more often. I imagine that there is a good reason for it,
> since Raynaud is just about as obvious as WV minimax / sequential
> dropping, and thus must have been discussed at some point.

Those election methods where successively the weakest candidate,
according to a given heuristic (e.g. MinMax, IRV, Bucklin, Borda), is
eliminated and the scores of the remaining candidates is recalculated
usually violate monotonicity.

Another problem is: When we agree e.g. that Reverse IRV finds the
worst candidate, then it is difficult to argue why IRV doesn't find
the best candidate.

Markus Schulze

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list