[EM] Benham's method looks best, among the Smith + CD methods

[Michael Ossipoff]

Benham's method can be vulnerable to burial when the CW has the smallest
facton (lowest 1st choice vote). But what's the most important CW to
protect from burial? What's the most likly size-comparison for the CW'
faction?

In every poll we ever conducted on EM, the CW was the Pluraliy winner.

Which is more worth protecing? A CW of the smallest faction,or of the
largest?

Say there are 3 candidates A, B, and C.

B is the middle CW. Sincere middle CW.

The A voters bury B.

How do the various Smith + CD methods do.

At least one of them elects A, rewarding the brial.

Some elect B  That's bette than electing A, but it doesn't deter burial.

Of the Smith + CD methods I looked at, only Benham elects C in that
scenario when A is the smallest faction.

Difference between Benham and Woodall:

I previously said that Woodall was a little better because it's more
particular among the Smith set. Instead of electing the Smith set member
whose defeatis by the least-favorite, it continues the IRV process to elect
the last unliminated Smith member.

But this example shows that there's merit in electng the candidate whose
defeat is by the least preferred...in the above situation.

While Woodall just continues IRV, Benham remembers what the A voters did,
and rubs their nose in it.

In what I consider the most important exampl, Benham wins

Michael Ossipoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20140429/965391aa/attachment-0003.htm>