Chris--
You said:
Take this often-discussed example:
49: A
24: B
27: C>B
MMPO scores: A52, B49, C49.
The result is a tie between B and C.
I reply:
Yes, I was saying that when there are a few factions, each one voting
exactly uniformly, as is necessarily the case in our examples, then MMPO can
be indecisive. But what I also said is that, in a public election with
thousands of voters, it's not going to be like that, and that indecisiveness
won't happen.
You continue:
Which "one vote" would you change
(and how) to change this result into not a tie?
I reply:
I wouldn't change people's ballots. If I were in a committee in which that
ballot-configuration occurred, I'd agree that it's a tie, rather than
changing anyone's ballot. I personally don't have a problem with that tie.
Maybe I'd suggest (in advance, of course) the use of Random Ballot for
solving ties. If people insisted on using another rank-count to solve ties,
I'd argue against any rank-count tiebreaker that would result in the loss of
FBC compliance.
If it were a public election, then that wouldn't happen anyway. As I said,
for obvious practical reasons, when writing examples, we specify a few
factions, each of which votes perfectliy uniformly. Even the slightest
deviiation from that uniformity would prevent that tie.
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
