[EM] RE : Re: A few concluding points about SFC, CC, method choice, etc.

[Dave Ketchum]

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 16:52:08 +0100 (CET) Kevin Venzke wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> --- Abd ul-Rahman Lomax <abd at lomaxdesign.com> a écrit :
> 
>>At 06:15 PM 2/16/2007, Kevin Venzke wrote:
...

> Nope. But you see that your criticism of Condorcet also applies to EUC.
> 
> 
>>If voters don't vote strategically, then it can fail to find the 
>>utility winner. Garbage in, garbage out.
>>
>>But the real practical question is whether or not it fails 
>>gracefully. And it appears that it does.
>>
> 
> I do think it is interesting to consider whether a method fails 
> "gracefully." The worst result under Condorcet methods is probably
> worse than the worst result under IRV. You have to ask also how much
> to worry about this relative to other concerns.
> 

A handy IRV demo that I included in email this AM showed that with 3 
candidates and 35A obviously deserving to lose to 65B, IRV happily awarded 
the win to A.

What can you trick Condorcet into that is nearly this bad?

When it gets this bad even voters might notice!


...

-- 
  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.