I said to add SFC to the unenhanced criteria trade, as if one were trading
CWP for MMPO. But the trade being discussed was SD for MMPO. Both of those
methods meet SFC, and so SFC isn't part of that trade.
So, as James said, it's a trade of Smith, Condorcet, MMC, and CL for FBC and
LNH.
I don't agree that that is a lousy trade. That's a subjective judgement, of
course, and, for someone else, concerned about different things than the
things that concern me, it could be a different matter.
I've told why FBC is worth the loss of those other criteria: FBC is very
much related to the matter of drastic defensive strategy need. Those other
criteria affect that less. Voters seem to feel a need to bury their
favorite, even with rank methods, and so it would be best to propose a rank
method that absolutely guarantees that they don't need to do that.
As embarrassing as CL failure might be, the fact is that it is not
important. And the badness of the government that could result is greatly
moderated and reduced by MMPO.
CC & MMC of course relatre to strategy, but not in the stark way that FBC
does. The really timid voter need's FBC's guarantee.
With enhancement, as I was saying, MMPO gains SDSC, ICC, MMC, GSFC, and
Strong FBC.
So, with enhancement, the trade is FBC and Strong FBC, for CL. That's an
overwhelmingly good trade.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee�
Security. http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
