Of course sometimes what something is called can affect its acceptance.
Among people who like or advocate IRV, a method that uses IRV to choose from
some selection set should be called "IRV with pre-elimination".
If the selection set is a good enough one, then even IRV can't do any harm
when choosing from it. And "IRV with pre-elimination" implies that the
selection set is just some preliminary elimination to prepare for IRV. So
that name makes IRV sound more important and central to the method than it
is, when really, with a good enough selection set, it doesn't even matter
how we choose from it.
I don't understand the difference between CDTT,IRV and CDTT//IRV. If the
recent message discussing that difference explains the difference, and if I
want to find out, then I should re-read that message. If that discussion is
considered a good explanation of the difference, then of course there's no
reason to explain it again.
Recently I've heard of some methods and sets that arre similar, or have
similar names. So I don't know exactly what the CDTT is, except that it's a
selection set.
In general, the set of candidates who could be elected without violating a
certain criterion can conveniently be named for that criterion.
For instance, the set of candidates who could be elected without violating
BC could be called "The BC set". That's a brief and convenient name.
If the BC set is the one that is called the CDTT, and if it was being called
the CDTT before Steve posted BC, then I'll start calling the BC set the
CDTT. Likewise with any other name that the BC set had before Steve posted
BC.
And, for example, if a method uses some other method to choose from the BC
set, it could be called BC//method. That's just like CDTT//IRV
BC// methods meet the majority defensive strategy criteria, SFC, GSFC, WDSC,
and SDSC. And choosing the tiebreaker gives an opportunity to add some other
desirable property, tailoring the overall method. But of course a
disadvantage of a compound method, a "//" method, is that it's more
complicated and therefore not as publicly acceptable. That goes for
Approval/ranking hybrids too.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
