[EM] No conditional or weak-preferring clauses. MAM doesn't need hierarchy.

Michael Ossipoff email9648742 at gmail.com
Mon Dec 16 18:25:22 PST 2013

 Two things have occurred to me:

1. Though I don't expect ideal-majoritarian-conditions voters to use
clone-nomination strategy, and though I didn't like the idea of
solving all cycles, even ones with equal defeats--Not solving cycles
can cause problems that I don't want.

For example, MMC failure. Though I like Approval and ICT for currrent
conditions, and accept their MMC failure because MMC isn't compatible
with the other properties needed in current conditions, there's no
reason to not have MMC when it is available, as it is in Green
scenario conditions and ideal majoritarian conditions. I considesr MMC
to be an important criterion, one that should be had when available.

Also, Clone-Independence failure can make a spoiler problem that the
method wouldn't otherwise have.

So I withdraw my suggestion about having the conditional clause and
the weaker-preferring clause, even though I liked them before I
realized the problems they'd cause.

So, Unconditional HDRP is te only kind that I propose. So now, when I
say "HDRP", I mean Unconditional HDRP, without either of those two
clauses added to any of the paragraphs.

2. Because the purpose and value of the hierarchy in HDRP is for
better dealing with equal defeats, and because MAM's dominance-order
makes equal defeats into effectively unequal defeats, then MAM has no
need for the hierarchial structure of HDRP. Plain MAM, as-is, is
completely sufficient.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list