[EM] Democracy Chronicles, introductions

[Andy Jennings]

On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Richard Fobes <
ElectionMethods at votefair.org> wrote:

> On 4/23/2012 12:05 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
>
>> On 04/22/2012 05:07 PM, Richard Fobes wrote:
>>
>>  The core of the system is VoteFair popularity ranking, which is
>>> mathematically equivalent to the Condorcet-Kemeny method, which is
>>> one of the methods supported by the "Declaration of Election-Method
>>> Reform Advocates."
>>>
>>
>> You said there are ballot sets for which the Kemeny method and VoteFair
>> provides different winners. How, then, can VoteFair be /mathematically/
>> equivalent? You say the differences don't matter in practice, but for
>> the method to be mathematically equivalent, wouldn't the mapping have to
>> be completely identical?
>>
>
> First of all, in the context of a publication that is read by
> non-mathematicians (which is what the Democracy Chronicles is) the word
> "equivalent" does not refer to a rigorous "sameness."
>

When you qualify it as "mathematically equivalent", it definitely does
refer to a rigorous "sameness".

Perhaps you should say "essentially equivalent".

~ Andy
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20120424/ca6e7eae/attachment-0004.htm>