Hi Kathy, You are responding to me, not Abd ul-Rahman Lomax.
--- En date de : Mar 16.12.08, Kathy Dopp <[email protected]> a écrit : > > Hi, > > > > --- En date de?: Dim 14.12.08, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax > <[email protected]> a ?crit?: > >> > >> That's not very generous. I can > think of > >> a couple of defenses. One would > >> > >> be to point out that it is > necessitated by > >> the other criteria that IRV > >> > >> satisfies. All things being equal, I > consider > >> LNHarm more desirable than > >> > >> monotonicity, for instance. > > Abd ul, > > That is about the strangest position I've seen you take > on any subject > because it is equivalent to saying that it is more > important for a > voting method not to hurt my lower choice candidates than > my first > choice candidates. The reason I believe LNHarm is more valuable than monotonicity is that when a method fails LNHarm, the voter is more likely to realize in what insincere way to vote differently, in order to compensate. When a method fails monotonicity, a voter will rarely know to do anything differently because of it. Thus, *all things being equal* (which must be kept in mind if it's IRV that is on your mind), I would expect that failing LNHarm will provoke more insincerity (and thus destroy more information) than failing monotonicity. IRV has other issues that can lead to a different conclusion, but that isn't what I was discussing. Kevin Venzke ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
