On May 14, 2005, at 8:39 PM, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
Arrow's result can best be reported as: Arrow proved that a few criteria that he likes are incompatible with eachother.
For some reason, many people have given those criteria undeserved status as the important criteria.
This does beg the question of if there is yet any consensus among vote theorists here and elsewhere as to what criteria *are* the "important criteria".
My own conjecture is that for *any* designed voting system, someone will be able to design a reasonable-sounding validity criteria that the voting system will fail.
Would anyone care to venture opinions on which of the criteria are absolutely required?
Perhaps we'd need a criteria to determine such criteria? :-)
Curt
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
