[EM] Majority Criterion poor standard for elections

[David Cary]

If some want to throw out the Majority Criterion in favor of
something better, then both the "something" and the "better" deserve
some scrutiny.  For example, here are some questions:

1.  If the Majority Criterion gets repudiated because it is
inconsistent with Range Voting, why is it that we know that Range
Voting is better?  Is there a replacement criterion, or is Range
Voting just being declared self-evident perfection?

2. What exactly is it that Range Voting maximizes, even assuming
sincere voting?  Is it social utility or social satisfaction?  What
are those?  How are they measured?

3. Exactly what is a sincere Range vote?  How do I as a voter know
what my sincere Range vote is?

4.  If Range Voting were maximizing anything that had a separate,
independent existence, wouldn't Range Voting satisfy an Independence
of Irrelevant Alternatives criterion?  If Range Voting doesn't
satisfy Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives, even with sincere
voting, does that mean that Range Voting is not really maximizing
anything?

-- David Cary

--- Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <abd at lomaxdesign.com> wrote:

> However, again, we are talking about election methods, per se. And 
> methods which ignore strength of preference cannot maximize social 
> utility. The data simply is not there. And if strength of
> preference is considered, there goes the Majority Criterion....


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com