Please explain CRAB.... Forest Simmons a �crit :
> Random ballot does satisfy strong FBC. > > I suspect that no majoritarian method absolutely satisfies strong FBC, > though some methods like the instant version of CRAB (Cumulative Repeated > Approval Balloting) satisfy it for all practical purposes. > > I'll write more when my Internet Service Provider quits acting up. > > Forest > > On Mon, 4 Nov 2002, Alex Small wrote: > > > Elisabeth Varin/Stephane Rouillon said: > > > Alex, > > > does any method satisfy strong FBC? > > > > Good question. I know that Condorcet methods don't, and monotonic > > majoritarian methods don't. Rated methods don't. If I could show that > > majoritarian methods don't, irrespective of montonicity, I'd be > > satisfied. We know that IRV is non-monotonic but majoritarian, but it > > doesn't satisfy strong FBC. Maybe I need different techniques. > > > > I started looking at the case where we remove monotonicity. You have to > > consider the possibility that favorite betrayal gives the same result as > > a voter changing his preference from A>B>C to A>C>B. Then you have a > > new electorate. But then you have to look at the new electorate and try > > to figure out which faction to tinker with. The number of scenarios to > > consider grows out of control. If I can just find a path out of that, > > one that takes me in a circle to expose a contradiction, I'll be happy. > > > > Any thoughts on extending the current results to 4 or more candidates? > > > > > > > > Alex > > > > > > > > ---- > > For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), > > please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em > > > > > > ---- > For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), > please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
