Re: Another proposal.
On Mon, Nov 18, 2002 at 05:28:37PM -0500, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
> However, if you add the rule that anyone losing pairwise to Z is
> eliminated early, B would be eliminated early, and A would win. So
> this is an example where the special rule involving the default
> option encourages strategic voting. And I don't think you could
> argue that this is a good thing.
Note that the Nov 18 draft doesn't eliminate anyone early.
> To state my view directly, I strongly feel that in an election with
> no supermajority or quorum requirement, the default option should be
> treated as any other.
> Does anyone have a good argument against that?
You've made a strong argument against early elimination.
You've not made a strong argument against quorum requirements. Nor have
you made a strong argument against supermajority requirements.