[EM] Fwd: MAM dominance-order by Borda or Score, instead of random ballot?
email9648742 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 23 09:45:18 PST 2014
I've been disussing voting systems, here and there.. I speak of four kinds
1. Current condition
3. Ideal majoritarian conditions
4. Non-Majoritarian, unselfish, sincere-rating conditions
For ideal majoritarian conditionss, I recommend MAM as the best method.
But, when a dominance-order is needed, when there are several
equally-weakest defeats in a cycle, alone or with stronger defeats, why not
let the dominance-order be decided by a Borda count, instead of by a
In family, friends, or organizational voting, where voters aren;t strategic
(which is why freedom from favorite-burial need and chicken-dilemma lets it
be ideal majoritarian conditions), then there's no reason to not use Borda.
And Borda is relatively decisive, even with as few as 2 or 3 voters (of
course you'd only use a pairwise-count method with at least 3 voters--with
only 2, you'd use Borda or Score.)
And, with very few voters, if Borda proved to not be decisive enough to
provide the needed domnance-order, then a special Score election could be
called for by the rules.
Of course, in many-voters elections, Borda would always be decisive enough..
Maybe there'd be some concern that voters would do Borda strategy,but
doesn't seem likelly, with MAM as the primary method, and Borda only for
To repeat from before, here is my MAM definition (not including the part
about making the dominance-order):
A defeat contradicts a set of other defeats if it is in a cycle consisting
only of it and them.
A defeat is a discarded defeat if it contradicts a set of not-discaded
defeats each of which is either stronger than it, or else equal to it and
higher in the dominance-order.
[end of MAM definition]
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Election-Methods