[EM] Participation Criteria and Bucklin - perhaps they *can* work together after all?

[Jameson Quinn]

2013/6/17 Benjamin Grant <benn at 4efix.com>

> Is **this** an example of Bucklin failing Participation?****
>
> ** **
>
> 5: A>B>C****
>
> 4: B>C>A****
>
> ** **
>
> A wins
>

Right

> ****
>
> ** **
>
> But add these in:****
>
> 2: C>A>B****
>
> ** **
>
> B wins.
>

Yes, with your "tiebreaker". Good job. But for other Bucklin "tiebreakers",
you might have to change this scenario some. For instance, in ranked ¿DAT?,
this example doesn't work, as A still wins after the added votes. However,
ranked ¿DAT? still fails participation in the more-complex scenario I gave
earlier.

Jameson

> ****
>
> ** **
>
> If I didn’t make any mistakes, is this the failing of strictly ranked
> Bucklin versus Participation?****
>
> ** **
>
> -Benn Grant****
>
> eFix Computer Consulting****
>
> benn at 4efix.com****
>
> 603.283.6601****
>
> ** **
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20130617/f3cb181d/attachment-0004.htm>