[EM] Majority

[Colin Champion]

I'm confused... I thought Forest was providing a philosophical argument 
in favour of minimax, but I can't read Kevin's reply as expressing 
philosophical doubts over that method.
    As for philosophy... I think it's important that the average voter 
should be able to see that the electoral system is *a* fair way of 
identifying a collective preference, but too much to ask for that he or 
she should recognise it as *the* best way. The former needs a 
philosophical argument similar to Forest's (understood as referring to 
minimax).
    CJC

On 29/05/2022 18:07, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> Hi Forest,
>
> For me, it would be necessary to "lock" the actually voted majorities in some way,
> so that the thought experiment majorities don't override them and refute what they
> stated.
>
> Otherwise I think it's too spoiler-prone: If you're barely on the losing end of a
> majority, but the majority was burdened with an additional candidate, then you
> are more likely to win. You just need to squeak past the majority, while they need
> far more additional votes to beat each other.
>
> I would maybe form the CDTT (i.e. the Schwartz set resulting from replacing
> non-majorities with ties) and only allow the thought experiment's winner to be a
> candidate from the CDTT.
>
> But this would still violate Plurality (and certainly lacks elegance).
>
> Kevin
>
>