[EM] James, 9 April, 2355 GMT

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

James--



You said:

	This probably won't impress you into thinking that it's a good
definition, but I note it as a response to your comments on common usage:
The IRV people use "majority defeat" in much the way that I have been
using it. Take the following ballots:
45: A
45: B
4: C>A
6: C
	They will tell you that A wins over B by a majority, because after C is
eliminated, the 6 C ballots are considered to be spoiled ballots. They
will say that in the A-B simulated runoff, A wins by a majority of
non-spoiled ballots (49 out of 94 = 52.13%). The same logic can be applied
to pairwise comparisons.

I reply:

Though there's precedent for calling a pairwise defeat a majority, it isn't 
a good usage, because "majority" has another meaning. There's no other word 
for "more than half of the voters". So why take the word for that, 
"majority", and use it for another meaning that already has a word: 
"pairwise defea"? So, I'm not saying that your use of "majority" is 
incorrecgt or unprecedented, only that it would be better to not use a word 
whose main meaning is a different meaning. Just for the sake of 
understandableness.

As for the IRVists' usage, you know that it's well agreed on EM that the 
IRVists' "majoritly" is a phoney, IRV-manufactured majority.


Mike:
>thanks for telling us, but you've merely substituted one word for another.

You said:

	If you don't think that what I'm trying to do is useful, that's fine.

I reply:

If you're trying to reach IRVists, that's useful (if successful). But no one 
has ever succeeded.
Good luck.

You continue:

We
can just drop the issue at that point, I think.

I reply:

Certainly. No point arguing about different definitionsd, especially when 
they both have precedent and when no substantive issue is involved.

You continued:

I understand what you are
trying to do with your majority rule definition: you want to use it as
part of your definition of defensive strategy, right?

I reply:

I use "majority rule" in my _offensive_  strategy definition. But I probably 
have a  better offensive strategy definition now.

Though I've, in previous weeks, often been sloppily saying "majority rule" 
in my defensive strategy definition, actually I replaced "majority rule" 
with "majority wishes" some time ago (and then forgot that change in some 
fairly recent postings).

"majority wishes" is defined the same as "majority rule", except that it 
involves pairwise preferences rather than pairwise votes.

Defensive strategy is strategy whose purpose is to protect the win of a CW, 
or to protect majorilty wishes (prevent a violation of majority wishes).

It might be (probably is) best to define offensive strategy as stragtegy 
that can make someone else need defensive strategy. Exact wording not 
written yet. For one thing, using ratings difference to protect the CW's win 
in Cardinal Pairwise would no longer be both defensive and offensive 
strategy. It would then only be defensive strategy, which is more in keeping 
with what we would expect a good definition to say.

You continue:

I was interested in
a majority rule definition with a different purpose. Specifically, I was
interested in a definition that we Condorcet-appreciating people could use
to show IRV supporters that IRV only "ensures majority rule" in a very
weak sense.

I reply:

IRV is a big violator of majority rule by my definition too. My definition 
brings out a stronger sense in which IRV violates majority rule. Not just 
violatinlg a public pairwise preference, or a public pairwise vote, but a 
violation of a majority pairwise vote.

You continued:

We had different purposes, which explains why we came up with
different definitions. I'm guessing that there is no further need to argue
about it.

I reply:

Quite so. I only argued when it seemed as if my own definitions and criteria 
were getting criticism or objection.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to 
get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement