[EM] A method with no need for defensive strategy to protect a CW's wn

[Michael Ossipoff]

Name of Method:

…

CW,Takedown-Elimination (CTE)

…

or

…

Simmons-Ossipoff  Method

…

Okay yes, I like the 2nd one.

…

It adds an enhancement to any of several already-existing
elimination-methods.

…

Here are 3 elimination-methods that eliminate 1 candidate at a time:

…

RCV/IRV:  Eliminates lowest topcount

…

Coombs: Eliminates highest bottomcount

…

Baldwin; Eliminates lowest Borda-score.

…

Any one of those can be the “base-method” .

…

Method rule:

…

Ranked balloting. Equal-rankng & truncation allowed.

…

1)  Check for a CW & elect hir.

…

2) If none, do the base-method.

…

3) During the doing of the base-method:

…

When the base-method’s rule eliminates a candidate, eliminate additionally
anyone who is pair-beaten by that candidate.  …& additionally any candidate
beaten by that 2nd candidate.

…

That’s takedown & secondary takedown.

…

4) If anyone becomes un-pairbeaten due to elimination of who beats hir,
s/he wins.

…

5) Continue till only one candidate remains uneliminated.

…

[end of count-rule definition]

…

Though it was Forest who introduced the unprecedentedly gamechanging
Takedown, & applied it to Coombs & Baldwin, the bombast in this post is all
mine.

…

Obviously a CW wins if voting is sincere.

…

There’s no offensive strategy for changing the CW to one’s own favorite.

…

There’s no need for defensive strategy to protect the win of a CW.

…

While MinMax(wv), Schulze, RP(wv) & Smith//MinMax(wv) require defensive
truncation to deter burial strategy against the CW, the above-defined
method requires no such defensive strategy, & voters can rank all the way
down to the bottom if they want to.

…

Michael Ossipoff
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20231006/581d39df/attachment.htm>