[EM] Strategy-free criterion

[Michael Ossipoff]

Some time ago, I wrote a criterion that I called Strategy-Free-Criterion
(SFC).

Is that what you were referring to?

It was about a circumstance in which wv Condorcet is strategy-free. At that
time, autodeterence hadn’t been considered.

SFC didn’t catch-on, & I haven’t heard mention of it lately, & so I don’t
know it’s definition. But wv Condorcet is strategy-free in a meaningful
sense.

On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 05:07 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 14:15 Closed Limelike Curves <
> closed.limelike.curves at gmail.com>
> Ppwrote:
>
>> I'm trying to work out how the strategy-free criterion actually relates
>> to strategy, because it just sounds like it means the majority-Condorcet
>> criterion ("if a candidate majority-beats every other, they have to win if
>> everyone is honest"). @Michael Ossipoff ?
>>
>  Closed, isn’t “Strategy-Free Criterion” your new name for FBC.
>
> It’s a very inaccurate name. FBC-complying methods aren’t strategy-free in
> any sense.
>
>  But they’re free of any need for *drastic* defensive strategy
> (favorite-burial or any defensive order-reversal).
>
> You want strategy-free? The wv Condorcet methods, such as RP(wv) &
> MinMax(wv), are strategy-free in a meaningful sense…effectively free of
> need for any defensive strategy…due to their autodeterence.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240531/9805ddc0/attachment-0001.htm>