<html><head></head><body><div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:HelveticaNeue, Helvetica Neue, Helvetica, Arial, Lucida Grande, sans-serif;font-size:12px"><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60274"><span><font size="3">Hi Chris,</font></span></div><div class="qtdSeparateBR" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60273"><br><br></div><div class="yahoo_quoted" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60298" style="display: block;"> <div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60297"> <div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60296"> <div dir="ltr" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60295" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif; font-size: 16px;"> <font size="2" face="Arial" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60294"> <hr size="1" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62295"> <b id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62869"><span style="font-weight:bold;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62868">De :</span></b> C.Benham <cbenham@adam.com.au><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">À :</span></b> Michael Ossipoff <email9648742@gmail.com> <br><b id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62872"><span style="font-weight: bold;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62871">Cc :</span></b> EM <election-methods@lists.electorama.com>; Forest Simmons <fsimmons@pcc.edu><br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Envoyé le :</span></b> Mardi 22 novembre 2016 10h51<br> <b><span style="font-weight: bold;">Objet :</span></b> Re: [EM] Trying to have CD, protect strong top-set, and protect middle candidates too<br> </font> </div> <div class="y_msg_container" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60302"><br><div id="yiv4410041191"><div id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60301">
<div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300"><span style="font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60845">On 11/22/2016 9:25 AM, Michael Ossipoff
wrote:</span><br clear="none">
<br clear="none" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60832"><span style="font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60843">>>With </span><font size="3" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60876">MDDTR, if your plump for X makes hir lose, it's
because you added a ballot. It has nothing whatsoever to do
with the fact that the new ballot plumped for X.<br>>>Your ballot made X lose in spite of the fact that it was a
plump for X, not because it was a plump for X.<br>>>But in IRV, when you make X lose by raising hir from last place
to 1st place, that raising of X was the only thing that you did,
and it is the reason why X lost.</font></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300">
<font size="3" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_61028">><br clear="none"><span id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60840">>That "distinction" is meaningless and completely useless. The
idea that adding a ballot is "something you did" that rates a
mention is ridiculous.</span></font></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;"><font size="3"><br></font></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;"><font size="3" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60874">I'm not sure about this specific example but I think this kind of distinction could be a useful defense. For IRV I might argue that a mono-raise failure happens not just from raising the winner but also <i id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62253">lowering</i> some other, incidental candidate. The reason mono-raise failures are offensive is that supposedly the voter has done nothing but aid the preexisting winner. But at least in IRV i</font><span style="font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60873">t is not so clear as that.<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
<blockquote type="cite" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60311"><span class="yiv4410041191">
</span></blockquote>>Regarding MDDA, symmetrically completing the ballots only at the
bottom and having a moveable approval cutoff fixes its failures of
Mono-add-Plump<br clear="none">>and Plurality and Irrelevant Ballots Independence and in my
opinion makes it a good/acceptable method.</span></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 16px;"><br></span></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;" dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_61103">Hmm, with a movable cutoff MDDA already violates Plurality with three candidates. Do you think symmetric-completion of the bottom can save it?</span></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;" dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: 16px;"><br></span></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;" dir="ltr"><span style="font-size: 16px;" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_62843">For whatever interest it may be, I calculated the "DNA" for the method you describe and got the exact same 343-digit code as for ICA(explicit). That's the first time I've hit a method I already had...<br clear="none">
<br clear="none">
Chris Benham<br clear="none"></span></div><div class="yiv4410041191moz-cite-prefix" id="yui_3_16_0_1_1479854184911_60300" style="font-family: HelveticaNeue, "Helvetica Neue", Helvetica, Arial, "Lucida Grande", sans-serif;"><span style="font-size: 16px;"><br></span></div></div></div></div> </div> </div> </div></div></body></html>