At 3:04 PM -0500 1/7/03, Dave Ketchum wrote:
I find random ballots acceptable for resolving true ties, assuming the authority conducting the election agrees. I do not find them acceptable as an excuse for not doing what is possible with Condorcet vote counts.I agree. No matter what the voting system, a tie will always be a potential outcome and it simply may not be practical to repeat a vote, especially if it was a preference voting system and people were honest, until the tie disappears.
In this case, the only fair way, as near as I can tell, to resolve the situation would be through a random selection.
Eric offered a test case yesterday, and annoyed me by using a method that reported a tie - and which did not please him either.Actually, it was offered by Stephane Rouillon as a test case for my site and I merely repeated it since I found it annoying.
Steve Barney mentioned "Kemeny's method" yesterday, but did not provide enough defense to convince me that it belongs here.I found this paper on the web which looked interesting, but I haven't gone through it yet. Anyone care to comment?
http://econpapers.hhs.se/article/sprsochwe/v_3A18_3Ay_3A2001_3Ai_3A1_3Ap_3A79-89.htm
or
http://tinyurl.com/46tu
----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
