Rob, rob brown wrote:
> For instance, say there is no Condorcet winner. Candidates A, B and C > all have 8 pairwise wins. D has 7. Could D still be chosen as the > winner by any "reasonable" method? Yes. The method that just counts the number of pairwise wins is called Copeland. It hopelessly fails Clone Independence (Clone-Loser) and "Rich Party". Imagine that that there are three candidates, each with the same number of pairwise wins, and the Condorcet method elects X. Say that the top cycle is X>Z>Y>X Now say we add a clone of Y, that every voter ranks directly below Y. Now Y and Z will each have an extra pairwise win, one more than X and so now (by the "Copeland criterion") X must lose to Z or Y. Adding a clone of a losing candidate (not to say adding a Pareto-dominated candidate) has changed the winner. Parties and factions that run more candidates will have an absurd and unfair advantage. Chris Benham ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
