[EM] MAM vs Schulze

Toby Pereira tdp201b at yahoo.co.uk
Sun Oct 9 11:01:32 PDT 2016

I've never been able to work out why local independence of irrelevant alternatives (LIIA) is even something we should care about. It seems to be a criterion for the sake of a criterion.

      From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
 To: election-methods at electorama.com 
 Sent: Saturday, 8 October 2016, 20:55
 Subject: Re: [EM] MAM vs Schulze
On 10/08/2016 03:06 PM, C.Benham wrote:
> Mike,
> As far as I can tell, for all intents and purposes  MAM,  Schulze, River
> and  Smith//MinMax (wv)  are all just different wordings
> of the same method.
> If you think that MAM  is better than Shulze, then what criterion (that
> we might care about) is met by MAM and not Shulze?
> Or perhaps you have some example in mind where you think the MAM winner
> is much prettier than the Schulze  winner?

I'm not Mike (and I don't see his posts), but I would probably say LIIA
for MAM and IPDA/ISDA for River. 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20161009/4f1b113a/attachment.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list