[EM] "Mutual Plurality" criterion suggestion

[Chris Benham]

Greg,

I did have, but that wasn't it.  For the purpose of applying the test to 
methods, I think I defined it thus:

*If there is some losing candidate X  with fewer above-bottom votes than 
any other candidate, and all the ballots either
vote X below all other candidates (or ignore/truncate X) or vote X above 
all other candidates and all the other candidates equal bottom
(or ignored/truncated), then removing any number of the X-supporting 
ballots can't change the result.*

Maybe a better version is possible. My idea is that those ballots   
contain no information about any of the remotely competitive
candidates, but would normally (in jurisdictions that allow truncation 
or voting candidates equal-bottom)) be counted as valid, which
might not be the case if the criterion just talked about "blank" ballots.

Chris Benham


On 11/05/2018 7:44 PM, Greg Dennis wrote:
> Chris, do you have a precise definition of "irrelevant ballot"? Just a 
> ballot that expresses indifference between the smallest mutual 
> majority set?


---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com