[EM] Citation for immunity to strategic voting?

[James Green-Armytage]

Juho Laatu <juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk> writes:
>The method consists of two rounds. If the first round produces a 
>Condorcet winner, the second round is not needed. Otherwise the second 
>round will be held and also the tie breaking method is used if there is 
>a top cycle. (Clearly non-winning candidates could be excluded from the 
>second round but I won't discuss those rules further here.)

I brought this up in late May of 2004. As I recall, the idea didn't meet
with much support. I agree that runoffs are expensive and ideally
shouldn't be necessary, but there may be situations where the benefits
outweigh the costs. Once I designed cardinal pairwise, which seems to have
fairly strong anti-strategic properties with a single round, I stopped
talking about the two round system. Still, perhaps the idea should be kept
afloat to some degree, e.g. given a name and an electowiki page. I also
proposed a procedure in December 2003 which is similar but with no fixed
limit on the number of rounds... I consider this one to be excellent in a
small group scenario, but impractical when the number of voters is very
large.

my best,
James

references:
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2003-December/011393.html
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-May/date.html
http://fc.antioch.edu/~james_green-armytage/vm/antistratsum.htm