[EM] Maximal Lotteries

[Juho Laatu]

Even when the Condorcet criterion is taken as granted I think also methods that elect outside of the Smith set can be considered best in the sense that they elect the ideal winner with sincere votes.

Juho


> On 24. Jun 2025, at 1.14, Daniel Kirslis via Election-Methods <election-methods at lists.electorama.com> wrote:
> 
> For those of you who believe in the Condorcet winner criterion, is there anyone who doesn't agree that the maximal lotteries method is the theoretically soundest Condorcet method?
> 
> Amongst the Condorcet methods, it seems to me that maximal lotteries is clearly the best, at least in principle (that is to say, if we ignore more practical concerns about ease of administration and popular understanding). All deterministic Condorcet methods fail the participation criterion. Therefore, a non-deterministic method is the way to go, and the question becomes: "How shall we assign probabilities amongst the Smith set?" I cannot imagine a more elegant and fair-minded way of doing so than the maximal lotteries method.
> 
> Is there anyone out there who understands the maximal lotteries method but still thinks that there exists another method that better satisfies the Condorcet winner principle? If so, why?
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list info