[EM] DMC, Ties & Eppley's RVH

[Eric Gorr]

Dave Ketchum wrote:
> OnTue, 30 Aug 2005 14:45:58 -0400 Eric Gorr wrote:
> 
>> http://wiki.electorama.com/wiki/Definite_Majority_Choice
>>
>> When it comes to the handling of ties, what objections would there be 
>> to using Eppley's Random Voter Hierarchy (RVH - 
>> http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/MAM%20procedure%20definition.htm)?
>>
>>
>> It seems likely that injecting some possible randomness into an 
>> otherwise deterministic method would reduce the potential for 
>> strategic manipulation.
>>
>> Furthermore, it would make the complete explanation of DMC far similar 
>> then having to explain the six stages after which one still may(?) end 
>> up with an unresolved tie and no predefined way to resolve it.
>>
> I do not like Eppley, for sorting out an understandable description of
> what it does is too much pain for the possible good.  Sure, it does math
> and decides who won, but that level is not enough.

Sorry...I am having trouble understanding what you are attempting to say 
  here other then you do not like the RVH.

The RVH seems an excellent way to resolve ties, giving those candidates 
who are more preferred an advantage over those who are less preferred.