<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
  <head>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
  </head>
  <body>
    <p><br>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">And two, with this model there can
            be no
            controversy as to who should win. Every method has no choice
            other than to<br>
            elect the candidate with the most votes.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">[/quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <span style="font-size:13.5pt">Yes, that’s the definition of
          Vote-For-1
          (VF1).<span>  </span>The thing is, however, that some
          of us don’t like VF1.<br>
          …</span></blockquote>
      <br>
      In the model (initial scenario) I was describing all the voters
      were voting-for-one voluntarily, in a method that allows them to
      rank<br>
      as many candidates as they like.<br>
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">With wv methods,
            CW,Implicit-Approval, or
            MDDA, I’d always employ defensive-truncation, never ranking
            anyone whom I
            wouldn’t approve if the election were by Approval.<span>  </span>…&
            would advise others to do the same.<span></span></span></p>
        <span style="font-size:13.5pt">…</span></blockquote>
      In the case of Winning Votes methods, isn't the correct zero-info.
      strategy the reverse of that, i.e. to rank equal-top all those you
      would approve in an Approval election, and strictly rank<br>
      all the others (random-filling if necessary)?<br>
      <br>
      That is one of the reasons I don't like it.   <br>
      <br>
      <blockquote type="cite">
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The
          <span style="font-size:13.5pt">autodeterrent methods (when the
            best ones
            have been chosen) will deter offensive strategy by electing
            the Bus with
            greater probability than the buriers’ favorite.<span> 
            </span>…without anyone having to use any defensive-strategy.<span></span></span></p>
      </blockquote>
      <br>
      What in your opinion is the best (or at least one of the best) of
      the "auto-deterrent" methods?  I'm curious to see a clear
      definition and an example or two.<br>
      <br>
      <br>
      Chris Benham<br>
      <br>
      <br>
    </p>
    <div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 8/12/2023 5:06 pm, Michael Ossipoff
      wrote:<br>
    </div>
    <blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CAOKDY5BzWRzUHNY9+9D-O7MVHOd6pcP4YOHUMybTvgE6CKd=qQ@mail.gmail.com">
      <meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
      <div dir="ltr">
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">For some reason, half of my reply
            didn’t
            post, & so I’ll try again now:<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Chris Behnam said:<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">[quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">And two, with this model there can
            be no
            controversy as to who should win. Every method has no choice
            other than to<br>
            elect the candidate with the most votes.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">[/quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Yes, that’s the definition of
            Vote-For-1
            (VF1).<span>  </span>The thing is, however, that some
            of us don’t like VF1.<br>
            …<br>
            [quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">I think one mistake that Blake
            Cretney made
            quite a while ago (stemming from the mind-set I described at
            the beginning)<br>
            was to classify truncation as a variety of Burial strategy.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">[/quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Then Blake Cretney was mistaken.<span> 
            </span>Truncation can be strategic, or it can be
            lazy, or hurried, or due to the balloting only allowing a
            few rank-positions.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…&, if it’s strategic, it can
            be
            offensive or defensive strategy. <span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">With wv methods,
            CW,Implicit-Approval, or
            MDDA, I’d always employ defensive-truncation, never ranking
            anyone whom I
            wouldn’t approve if the election were by Approval.<span>  </span>…&
            would advise others to do the same.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<br>
            <a name="m_2099524129484636097_burying"
              moz-do-not-send="true"></a>[quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">The voting method should be very
            happy to
            assume that presumed (or imaginary) strict "preferences"
            that the
            voter chooses not to<br>
            express on the ballot for whatever reason (barring some
            over-strong truncation
            or compromise incentives) simply don't exist.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">[/quote]<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Assuming things isn’t the
            Condorcet’s job. It’s
            to count all of everyone’s pairwise preferences, & elect
            the candidate
            whose election they imply.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">i.e. to elect the “sincere CW” if
            there is
            one.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">That doesn’t say anything about
            there being
            an exception in the case where there’s a “sincere CW”, but
            no “voted CW” due to
            offensive-strategy.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Perhaps didn’t know it, but critics
            &
            opponents of Condorcet reject it because offensive strategy
            can defeat a “sincere
            CW”, &, for some unfathomable reason, they don’t like
            that.<br>
            …<br>
            If that happens, then the method is failing to fulfill its
            promise to the
            voters other than the offensive-strategizers. Condorcet’s
            purpose is being
            defeated.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">MinMax(wv), CW,Implicit-Approval,<span> 
            </span>& MDDA don’t let truncation of the CW
            prevent hir election<span>  </span>(unless maybe there’s
            humungous indifference, in which case it doesn’t matter a
            whole lot).<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">Those methods deter burial by
            electing the “Bus”
            (the candidate under whom the CW is buried), when the CW’s
            voters employ
            defensive strategy.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">i.e. Don’t rank anyone whom you
            wouldn’t vote
            for in Approval, if you want to deter burial of the CW to
            elect someone whom
            you wouldn’t vote for in Approval.<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif""><span
            style="font-size:13.5pt">…<span></span></span></p>
        <p
style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman","serif"">The
          <span style="font-size:13.5pt">autodeterrent methods (when the
            best ones
            have been chosen) will deter offensive strategy by electing
            the Bus with
            greater probability than the buriers’ favorite.<span> 
            </span>…without anyone having to use any defensive-strategy.<span></span></span></p>
      </div>
    </blockquote>
  </body>
</html>