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

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.



Reply to: