Jobst had written: > > Also, it seems difficult to sell a method when you must admit that > > advancing an option X may actually reduce X's winning probability... > > Steve replied: > That doesn't seem to be a problem for the Instant Runoff campaign. ;-) > Do you recall an example where it was difficult to sell a method due to > its non-monotonicity?
This should be no surprise because, at least in public elections with hundreds, thousands or ten-of-thousands of voters in each electoral district, non-monotonicity cannot be exploited either by the candidates or by the voters. It could be very different in successive elections by IRV or STV-PR where the whole electorate was a small committee of, say, ten members - then it MIGHT be possible for some voters to change their preference patterns to exploit the non-monotonicity to the benefit of their preferred candidates. But monotonicity is a completely irrelevant criterion so far as public elections are concerned. James Gilmour No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.17.13/1206 - Release Date: 01/01/2008 12:09 ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
