[EM] FBC, center squeeze, and CD

[C.Benham]

On 11/10/2016 11:48 AM, Michael Ossipoff wrote:

> But that doesn't change the fact that all of my examples of wv's CWs 
> "protection" guarantees had the CWs preferred from both sides, and 
> supported from one wing, the wing opposite the truncating or burying wing.
>
> That's the "wv-like strategy" that I've been referring to.
>
> ...even though wv has an additional anti-burial guarantee, or even 
> though its anti-burial guarantee is stronger and more general.

Mike,

I'm not completely clear on the exact definition of this 
property/criterion that you think is worth giving up compliance with 
Mono-add-Plump
and Plurality to have.

> Yes, in the standard chicken-dilemma example, MDDTR elects A, and 
> that's a violation of the Plurality Criterion. Try to forgive MDDTR 
> for electing the most favorite-popular candidate who isn't 
> majority-beaten  :^)

I'm afraid I find the justification "most favorite-popular candidate who 
isn't majority-beaten" to be quite oblique and arbitrary-sounding.

"Majority-beaten" can go away if we add a few ballots that just plump 
for nobody, so big deal. Either elect the candidate that is doing the
"majority-beating" or forget about it.

Chris  Benham

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20161110/3b0c10b9/attachment.htm>