[EM] Re: ICC and Approval

Russ Paielli 6049awj02 at sneakemail.com
Mon Jun 13 23:05:48 PDT 2005

James Green-Armytage James_Green-Armytage-at-antioch-college.edu 
|EMlist| wrote:
> Russ, you write:
>>Let me explain how I intuitively think about clones. Forget the formal 
>>definition and just think of clones as being perfectly identical to each 
> 	Even though it strikes some people as counter-intuitive, the formal
> definition is already well-established. If you define another criterion
> with a different definition but the same name ("independence of clones"),
> it will be a source of confusion. (Likewise, if you use the term "clones"
> in the context of voting theory to refer to something other than what Nic
> Tideman defined as a clone, it will be a source of confusion.)
> 	If you'd like to define a new criterion along the lines you describe,
> please give it a new name to avoid confusion.

You're right, James. I wouldn't want to confuse the general public by 
using the word "clone" in a manner consistent with its general usage. 
Let's instead perpetuate a misnomer into perpetuity so we can rehash it 
every time the subject comes up.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list