[EM] Does MAM use the Copeland method?

[Paul Kislanko]

Ok, let us just get this straight. I don't give a flying flip about any
criterion, and I don't have a favorite method.

I merely observe from the original ballots that 5 of 9 voters prefer C over
A. So those are the ones who will be unhappy if A is elected.

That majority will initiate a referndum that changes the voting method
because it selected the "wrong" candidate from the VOTERS perspective.

You academics can say A is right, but if that is so, this just demonstrates
that Plurality does as well as anything.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com 
> [mailto:election-methods-electorama.com-bounces at electorama.com
> ] On Behalf Of Steve Eppley
> Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2004 1:39 PM
> To: election-methods at electorama.com
> Subject: RE: [EM] Does MAM use the Copeland method?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Paul K asked:
> > Why should the 33 percent of the voting population who most dislike 
> > "A" be the cause of A to win, whereas 56 percent rank C>A ?
> 
> If the "B>C>A" votes of those 33% are deleted, then A still 
> wins.  I don't yet understand Paul's concern.
> 
> Paul, what's your favorite voting method?  How does it tally 
> that example, which I repeat here:
> 
>     The votes:
>     4: A>B>C
>     3: B>C>A
>     2: C>A>B
> 
> Most methods elect A, as MAM does.  Plurality elects A, IRV 
> elects A, etc.  Borda returns a tie between A & B, Copeland 
> returns a 3-way tie.  So I'm curious to learn why Paul thinks 
> A should be defeated...
> 
> If Paul thinks C should be elected, then I will point out 
> that a majority larger than 56% ranked B over C, and if he 
> thinks B should be elected, I will point out that a majority 
> larger than 56% ranked A over B.
> 
> Furthermore, the finish order A>B>C is the only ordering that 
> satisfies the specs in the Immunity from Majority Complaints 
> criterion, and MAM is the only method that is always immune 
> from majority complaints. (I refer to the criterion defined 
> in my web pages, not the weaker criterion that Jobst wrote 
> and to which he unfortunately gave the same name, which was 
> forwarded to this maillist a couple of weeks ago in a message 
> about Jobst's River method.  Forwarded by Ralph, if memory serves.)
> 
> --Steve
> 
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info
>