[EM] Greatest Majority is the future of elections

[Jameson Quinn]

>
>
>  3- Thus the goal would be determine the best or at least better structure
>> of govt./voting to require the greatest majority support possible.
>>
>
> now it depends on what you mean by "greatest majority support possible".
>  if it's the same as the least disappointment amount of voters possible,
> then i might be able to say that, *if* there is a Condorcet winner, the
> choice of candidate with the greatest support (sorta "maximin" or the
> minimax of voter disappointment) is the Condorcet winner (candidates other
> than the CW have a max disappointment that is positive, only the CW is
> negative).


The term "greatest majority support" (and thus also GMV) is ambiguous. Does
it mean "the largest possible majority"? Then it refers to minimax
condorcet, which finds the largest guaranteed majority - or, in a few cases,
when there is no guaranteed majority, the largest guaranteed minority.

Or does it mean "the candidate which has the greatest support from some
majority of the population"? That refers to Bucklin; specifically, to the
"median-range" / "Bucklin using a range ballot" version of Bucklin that Abd
likes to talk about.

Under no well-defined interpretation could it refer to IRV (or Range, or
Schulze, or....)

(In the naming poll <http://betterpolls.com/do/1189>, "GMV" is an option as
a name for IRV. But perhaps I should have offered "Largest Majority Voting"
as a name option for Condorcet, and "Strongest majority voting" as an option
for Bucklin.)

JQ
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20100903/3a3753c5/attachment-0003.htm>