[EM] Does MAM use the Copeland method?

[Paul Kislanko]

" All we know is that they 
> _preferred_ a defeated candidate."

The candidate wasn't "defeated" by the voters, it was only "defeated" by the
METHOD. 

If you look at my original analysis of the "election", my question was why
should the 33 percent of the voters who voted A LAST cause A to win.

No one who has attacked me has addressed that.

Give a logical explanation for why voting a candidate LAST should cause the
candidate to win in a system. My ears are open.



> -----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 3:46 PM
> To: election-methods at electorama.com
> Subject: RE: [EM] Does MAM use the Copeland method?
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Paul K wrote:
> > Any argument that begins with "perhaps they..." is a 
> speculation, not 
> > an argument. From the ballots, 55.555556 percent of the voters 
> > preferred a candidate that was not elected.
> 
> But that's what I'd pointed out:  All we know is that they 
> _preferred_ a defeated candidate.  Paul had claimed they were 
> also _unhappy_ and I gave a reason why they might not be 
> unhappy.  The burden is on Paul to explain why he claimed 
> they'd be unhappy.
> 
> I prefer Milky Way candy bars over Three Musketeers, but it 
> won't make me unhappy to be given a Three Musketeers bar.
> 
> In a separate message, Paul also wrote:
> > For the same set of ballots, pairwise comparisons result in a 
> > different winner based upon which voting method is 
> employed. So which 
> > one you use is an article of faith, not reason.
> 
> Most pairwise methods elect A in that example.  Copeland is 
> the only pairwise method I know that doesn't, and it returns 
> a 3-way tie.  Copeland//Plurality, the method advocated by 
> Bruce Anderson--the only member of this list who, to my 
> knowledge, ever advocated any variation of Copeland--also elects A.
> 
> Assuming Paul had his argument straight, that is, if he'd 
> cited an example where good pairwise methods do pick 
> different winners, his conclusion that which one of these 
> methods to use is an article of faith rather than reason 
> makes some sense to me, given that we cannot empirically 
> determine which method is best.  We can only make educated 
> guesses based on speculative arguments, and see which of 
> these arguments resonates with enough people to convince them 
> to give the method a try.  
> 
> In yet another message, Paul called it the Borda method to 
> use graded ballots such as A+, A, A-, B+, etc.  He's made so 
> many odd claims today, I must request he send me some of 
> whatever he's been imbibing.
> 
> --Steve
> 
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em 
> for list info
>