[EM] Ranked Pairs

Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_elmet at t-online.de
Sun Sep 17 03:39:44 PDT 2023

On 9/17/23 10:25, Colin Champion wrote:
> Michael - I don't think I understand everything you're saying. I was 
> referring to RP (margins), which I believe is the form in which Tideman 
> specified it, and I assumed that truncation was a mixture of laziness 
> and ignorance. (Actually the simulation I referred to assumed mandatory 
> truncation, which I think is common in the US.) I don't hold any brief 
> for RP; on the contrary I much prefer minimax (also margins).
>     I do indeed think that voters will have difficulty in rank-ordering 
> lots of candidates, or even in examining and choosing between them. I 
> hoped that the primary I proposed would make the best of voters who were 
> unable to assess the entire field, since if they voted for someone 
> they'd heard of, and that candidate got eliminated, then their vote 
> would be transferred to someone they might like, even if they didn't 
> realise it.
>     Colin

Here's a thought: does there exist a method that is Condorcet, 
cloneproof, yet does not pass Smith? It's probably doable to create one, 
but the least contrived ways of getting clone independence do seem to 
generate Smith as a "side effect" of sorts. E.g. Schulze and RP.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list