On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 21:35 -0500, Warren Smith wrote: > Arguably STV multiwinner electiosn are still of interest for single-winner > purposes since the FIRST winner is a single-winner IRV winner. Not really. Consider the following:
300 voters, 2 winners (Droop quota of 101) 101 A 99 B, C 100 C Here the first STV winner is quite clearly A, but A is not the IRV winner. > Incidentally the comment by somebody that non-montonicity spotting in IRV > elections is NP-hard, is misleading. That result is only true in an > unrealistic > limit where both the number of candidates & voters tnd to infinity. > > If the #candidates is held fixed nd the #voters is made large (more > realistic) then > the task is fully in polynomial time. MOst of these NP-hardness results in > voting theory are almost completely uninteresting for this exact reason. I'm sorry, but this explicitly conflicts with the conclusions of the paper I linked to here, where the set C of candidates and V of voters are most certainly finite numbers: http://www.isye.gatech.edu/people/faculty/John_Bartholdi/papers/stv.pdf Could you clarify? Thanks, Scott Ritchie ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
