[EM] Comments on the declaration and on a few voting systems

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Oops! I forgot that B voters ranked C. 
.
Yes, C wins, even though C has a very low Plurality score. 
.
But PC isn't intended to be Plurality. In fact, none of us want Plurality, 
so why should we use it for the standard for evaluating propoed 
replacemens for it? Plurality is not what we want.
.
We don't say, "Don't vote for candidate X, because he isn't enough like
the incumbant"
.
After all, if agreement with Plurality us which results are better than others, then
wouldn't that imply that we should keep Plurality instead of replacing it?
.
We propose methods that meet criteria that are important to us, methods
that do important things that we prefer. For me, that means getting
rid of Plurality's lesser-of-2-evils problem as well as possible. PC and
MMPO do so excellently.
 
Mike 
 
  		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111015/bfa14cf2/attachment-0002.htm>