[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Condorcet Voting and Supermajorities (Re: [CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT] Disambiguation of 4.1.5)



At 02:23 PM 11-30-2000 -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
[third pass]

On Thu, Nov 30, 2000 at 02:00:57PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> Surely you agree that a minority of people being able to subvert the
> resolution procedure to get what they want instead of what the majority
> want is a bad thing?

I think I agree with your underlying point -- that this kind of
discrepancy in the voting system indicates a flaw.

This sounds like what the www.electionmethods.com site calls the "Strong Defensive Strategy Criterion": "If a majority of the voters prefer candidate A to candidate B, then they should have a way of voting that will ensure that B cannot win, without any member of that majority reversing a sincere preference for one candidate over another or insincerely voting two candidates equal."


I disagree with your emotional loading (e.g. the use of words like
"subvert"), but you still have a valid point.

Is the wording of the SDSC better?



Thanks,

--
Raul


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org



Reply to: