[EM] Re: DMC / 2-party domination

[Kevin Venzke]

Ted,

--- Araucaria Araucana <araucaria.araucana at gmail.com> a écrit :
> On 29 Aug 2005 at 12:59 UTC-0700, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> >> Here is another question - will DMC lead to 2-party domination, or
> >> not?  To really answer this, it would help to understand optimal
> >> voting strategy in DMC, which is probably beyond reach.
> >
> > The argument that some ranked methods lead to 2-party domination is
> > based on the possibility that voters will use "favorite betrayal" to
> > ensure that they don't sink their most viable frontrunner.
> >
> > So it seems to me that, using this reasoning, any method which fails
> > Mike Ossipoff's "favorite betrayal" criterion will lead to 2-party
> > domination.
> >
> > DMC doesn't satisfy the "favorite betrayal" criterion.
> >
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> I think that favorite betrayal occurs in the primaries, before the
> general election slate is even drawn up.
> 
> TTFN,

What do you disagree with?

If you disagree that DMC fails FBC, I don't have a failure example at
the moment. But I would be shocked if DMC satisfies FBC, since DMC is a
Condorcet method.

When I read your second paragraph, you seem to be arguing that even methods
which satisfy FBC will fail it if there are primaries. But that doesn't
seem to be a disagreement with anything I said.

When I referred to "the argument..." I was referring to Warren's argument.
Perhaps that's where you disagreed.

I don't know what "TTFN" means.

Kevin Venzke



	

	
		
___________________________________________________________________________ 
Appel audio GRATUIT partout dans le monde avec le nouveau Yahoo! Messenger 
Téléchargez cette version sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com