[EM] Chris: Forest's FBC/ABC method

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Chris--

I'll describe Forest's proposal briefly:

It's minmax margins (but it's defined as maxmin, with respect to x>y - y>x), 
looking at all pairwise comparisons, rather than just at defeats.

But, instead of just x>y - y>x, it's x top or >y  - y>x. 

As I said in my other posting, it seems to have the same properties
as MMT. In other words, FBC, LNHa, 3P, and the (unnecessary) Mono-Add-Plump
and the (unnecessary) avoidance of electing C in Kevin's MMPO "bad"-example.

Though Mono-Add-Plump and complying in Kevin's example are unnecessary,
they avoid misguided or dishonest criticism by opponents of a reform proposal.

As I've said, maybe it's better to ask for a little less than MMPO and MDDTR,
in order to avoid the distraction that such criticisms could cause, during an
enactment campaign.  --especially given that the opponents are likely to have
a lot more media money than the proponents.

Mike Ossipoff

 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111205/d0090882/attachment-0003.htm>