MIKE OSSIPOFF vs The list (Re: [EM] I didn't choose to be the topic
markus.schulze at alumni.tu-berlin.de
Tue Feb 1 04:18:23 PST 2005
Dear Craig Carey,
instead of insulting those who don't agree with you,
you should rather try to convince them.
The IFPP winner is candidate A although a majority of the
voters strictly prefers candidate B and candidate C to
candidate A. This example demonstrates that IFPP violates
e.g. (1) majority for solid coalitions, (2) independence
of clones, (3) reversal symmetry, and (4) majority loser.
My method (aka Schwartz sequential dropping, cloneproof
Schwartz sequential dropping, beatpath method, beatpath
winner, path voting, path winner, strong immunity from
binary arguments) satisfies these criteria.
Suppose, in example 1, 5 CBA voters didn't go to the polls.
Then example 1 had looked as follows:
Now, the IFPP winner is candidate B. This example
demonstrates that IFPP violates mono-remove-bottom.
My method satisfies mono-remove-bottom in the
2-, 3- and 4-candidate case.
The quota is 12. A and D are eliminated in the first round,
then B beats C.
D is eliminated in the first round. In the second round,
the quota is 16 so that A and B are eliminated and C wins.
This example demonstrates that IFPP violates monotonicity.
My method satisfies monotonicity.
Please convince me that IFPP was better than my method!
More information about the Election-Methods