Near the end of his message Mike wrote ...
It seems to me that the first step of sprucing-up was to eliminate every candidate who isn't in a certain selection set. The set of candidates who could win without violating BC? And then was that followed immediately by the collapsing of beat-clone-sets? A two-part procedure?Anyway, I guess I'll keep looking. But Forest, could you post the full complete definition when you get a chance to? Forest replies: The "certain selection set" evolved over time from Smith, to Uncovered, to Banks, to Duda, to "Minimal Covering Set," and yes, that step was followed by clone collapsing, but I abandoned the spruce up quest for two reasons: 1. It satisfied Smith, which I came to believe was too restrictive. [And we suspect that Smith is incompatible with the FBC.] 2. Spruced up random ballot turned out to be non monotonic, due to the restriction to the Uncovered Set (or its more restrictive subsets). And I suspect that clone collapsing by itself could also impair monotonicity; I'm not sure. So the method never came to a definitive form. The nearest it came to a definitive form was in a posting that I wrote in reply to somebody that wanted to do a Wiki page on it. I'll try to find that if you want me to. Ted Stern was following the discussion pretty closely back then; perhaps he can find it. Forest
<<winmail.dat>>
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
