Chris,
--- Chris Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Participants,
> I've had a request from John Hodges, who used to
> subscribe and contribute to EM.
>
> > could you ask the EM folk for an evaluation of the
> properties of CNTT,QLTD?
In short, it satisfies Condorcet and Smith but fails everything that
Bucklin fails. Since you're not eliminating non-Smith members, it doesn't
satisfy "Local IIA."
> in terms of criterion compliances,but John thinks that
> CNTT,QLTD might have compensating practical
> advantages.
I don't think so; you'd have to keep track of the Bucklin matrix in
addition to the pairwise one.
And if you eliminated non-Smith members, you'd have to reconsider each
ballot.
It also seems to me that Bucklin is easier to explain than QLTD, while
satisfying the same criteria.
Kevin Venzke
__________________________________________________________________
D�couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails !
Cr�ez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
