[EM] Poll, preliminary ballots

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 2024-04-18 20:43, Richard, the VoteFair guy wrote:

> It's easy to overlook the many failures that do not fit within NAMED 
> failure types.  Those unnamed kinds of failures are being ignored!
> 
> For example, clone failures and Local IIA failures are just two 
> categories within the broad category of IIA failures.
> 
> This is why I presume the Schulze method fails the various unnamed IIA 
> criteria in order to have zero clone failures.
There doesn't need to be a fixed proportion of failures, does there?

Suppose I take Schulze and break ties by Plurality so that it's no 
longer cloneproof. I don't think that the rate of non-clone IIA failures 
would decrease just because it now fails clone independence.

So Schulze's rate of IIA failures don't need to be a consequence of 
having zero clone failures. It's possible that other methods have clone 
failures *and* just as many other IIA failures.

-km