That I'm aware of, favorite betrayal is almost always a tool to help someone besides your favorite. Think of plurality: you vote the "lesser evil".<div><br></div><div>Only in a non-monotonic method could it be otherwise. The only non-monotonic methods worth even mentioning are runoff methods.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Jameson<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">2011/6/6 Peter Zbornik <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:pzbornik@gmail.com">pzbornik@gmail.com</a>></span><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Dear all,<br>
<br>
two clarifications.<br>
With "favorite" i mean the "sincere favorite" below.<br>
<br>
A correction of an unfinished sentence (addition in CAPITALS):<br>
<div class="im">MFBC and MSFBC say basically, that if some of the voters who have A as<br>
</div>a first preference (i.e. vote A>(OR =)...[the other candidates]) in an<br>
<div class="im">election where A does not win, change preferences between A and the<br>
other candidates so, that A is less prefered than before (example A>B<br>
turns to B>A, A=B turns to B>A, A>B turns to A=B) and the preference<br>
</div><div class="im">between the other candidates (excluding A) do not change (i.e. it is<br>
</div>not allowed for B>C to turn B=C or C>B) THEN CANDIDATE A CANNOT WIN<br>
EITHER.<br>
<br>
Basically, you cannot make your losing (sincere) favorite win by<br>
ranking him lower, if he didn't win before.<br>
<br>
Best regards<br>
Peter Zborník<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 8:42 PM, Peter Zbornik <<a href="mailto:pzbornik@gmail.com">pzbornik@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Dear Markus Schulze and all others,<br>
><br>
> Thanks for the example.<br>
> I messed things up a bit with a bad definition, my appologies.<br>
> What I would like to see was a violation of a weaker criterion (that<br>
> is clear from the example specification).<br>
><br>
> What I would like then to see a proof of violation, is a less general<br>
> l variant of FBC (changes to FBC in capitals):<br>
> 1. MFBC: A voting method satisfies the Modified Favorite Betrayal<br>
> Criterion (MFBC) if there do not exist situations where a voter is<br>
> only able to obtain A WIN FOR HIS OR HER FAVORITE by insincerely<br>
> listing another candidate ahead of his or her sincere favorite WHILE<br>
> THE PREFERENCES BETWEEN THE OTHER CANDIDATES REMAIN UNCHANGED.<br>
><br>
> and conversly<br>
><br>
> 2. MSFBC: A voting method satisfies the Modified Strong Favorite<br>
> Betrayal Criterion (SFBC) if there do not exist situations where a<br>
> voter is only able to obtain a A WIN FOR HIS OR HER FAVORITE by<br>
> insincerely listing another candidate ahead of or equal to his or her<br>
> sincere favorite WHILE THE PREFERENCES BETWEEN THE OTHER CANDIDATES<br>
> REMAIN UNCHANGED.<br>
><br>
> MFBC and MSFBC say basically, that if some of the voters who have A as<br>
> a first preference (i.e. vote A>...[the other candidates]) in an<br>
> election where A does not win, change preferences between A and the<br>
> other candidates so, that A is less prefered than before (example A>B<br>
> turns to B>A, A=B turns to B>A, A>B turns to A=B) and the preferences<br>
> between the other candidates (excluding A) do not change (i.e. it is<br>
> not allowed for B>C to turn B=C or C>B).<br>
><br>
> I wanted to say (but didn't do very clearly) is that MFBC and MSFBC<br>
> hold for all Condorcet (Shulze reference) elections.<br>
><br>
> Sorry for that and thanks for the example.<br>
><br>
> So I lost challenge one due to a messy specification, that counts too.<br>
><br>
> So challenge 2 is to prove MFBC and MSFBC are violated for Condorcet<br>
> elections with or without generalized symmetric completion.<br>
><br>
> Maybe the result that MFBC and MSFBC hold is trivial, or stems from<br>
> some other result, like consistency.<br>
><br>
> Best regards<br>
> Peter Zborník<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 7:30 PM, Markus Schulze<br>
> <<a href="mailto:markus.schulze@alumni.tu-berlin.de">markus.schulze@alumni.tu-berlin.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>> <a href="http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2005-May/015945.html" target="_blank">http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2005-May/015945.html</a><br>
>><br>
>> ----<br>
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
>><br>
><br>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>