[EM] Automatic LIIA Independent of Locking Order

[Gustav Thorzen]

On Fri, 1 May 2026 21:41:25 +0000 (UTC)
Toby Pereira <tdp201b at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>  Gustav and Kristofer - I might have not thought that through properly. I was only considering removing candidates from one end of the pecking and not the other.
> I also agree it can be of theoretical interest and that there may be even some cases where it is of practical use. But when I see it listed alongside other criteria as if it's an equal, I wonder how it made the list.
> But regardless of practicalities, and just from a theoretical "good candidate" standpoint, if you have an A>B>C>A cycle and A is the winner, I don't have any intuition that tells me B should automatically be considered better than C, which LIIA would suggest is the case. (Obviously B beats C pairwise but we have a cycle.)

Well that solves that mystery.
I would say your procedure still gives the core benefit of LIIA,
and thereby makeing it most (entirely?) irrelevant unless computational costs
are considered a big deal and creating a full outcome rankorder is importaint.
Though it becomes totally irrelevant if a candidate is supposed
to earn/qualify for their win/unit of representation,
rather then being the least terrible lesser evil.

If the critera its listed and presented alongside with are things like
Avoid Favorite Betrayal, Monotonicity, Participation,
and Pairwise Beat family of criteria,
then I also agree on that point.

Gustav