[EM] Chris--Plurality, a pork chop, and NDD

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Chris--

>Plurality passes Non-Drastic Defense. Suppose that
"to rank" means " to rank in a rank-balloting system".
In that case, no one can write a Plurality example
that complies with the premise of Non-Drastic Defense.
That means that no one can write a Plurality NDD
failure example, and that Plurality passes NDD.

Yes, and by that logic, so does a pork chop.

I reply:

Yes, but, since Plurality, IRV, and Margins all fail SFC, GSFC, WDSC, SDSC, 
and FBC, they all do worse than a pork chop.

But yes, you're right that meeting a criterion just by being exempted by its 
premise isn't a very meritorious way to meet a criterion. Condorcet wv meets 
the majority defensive strategy criteria by the fact that when examples are 
written that meet those criteria's premises, wv meets their reqiurements.

But even if a pork chop doesn't fail criteria, by virtue of not being a 
voting system, it still has the disadvantage that it wouldn't really help 
with voting.

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