[EM] Quick and Clean Burial Resistant Smith, compromise

[Colin Champion]

A bit of a side question, but is strategy resistance a good metric to quote?
    FIrstly, you'd never rank methods on it - you'd end up choosing a 
coin toss.
    Secondly, voting methods recommended for their resistance to 
tactical voting sometimes have the property that when they go wrong, 
they make larger mistakes than those made by methods targeting sincere 
voting. If you don't take this into account, you can draw misleading 
conclusions.
    Thirdly, consider a 3-candidate election using IRV. The central 
candidate is the Condorcet winner, but supporters of one of the 
non-central candidates realise that the opposed non-central candidate is 
likely to win owing to the operation of a centre squeeze, and therefore 
compromise on the central candidate. This satifies JGA's definition of 
strategic manipulation but is certainly not an additional fault in IRV; 
on the contrary, it's a mitigation of its weakness under sincere voting.

My own practice has been to measure the performance of methods in the 
presence of tactical voting exactly as I would in its absence, simply 
skipping over any attempted manipulation which doesn't lead to a worse 
result.

CJC