oops. forgot to finish a sentence.
On Jan 14, 2010, at 1:12 PM, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
We know that we can't have a system with all the properties that we
might independently desire. Consequently, we compare systems
overall, looking not just at their list of properties met and
unmet, but at the implications for voter behavior, nomination,
campaigns, and so on.
Those implications have been widely discussed on this list, and I
won't try to repeat those discussions. Suffice it to say that to
elevate a single criterion, CW or LNH or other, to the sole
criterion by which we judge methods just doesn't cut it.
with a single winner election (like mayor or some other executive, or
a single representative), the elected candidate should be considered
"better" or "superior" to every other, any other, candidate propped
up against him/her. if it's not about democracy, then we can think
up other tests of merit, like a written civil-service like exam. or
age or years of experience. or we could get Machiavellian about it
and give it to the candidate with more guns and fighters. or we
could have them arm wrestle or throw darts. but, i cannot imagine,
in a democracy, a criterion for "better" other than preferred by more
voters than voters who prefer the other candidate.
with the arbitrary assumption pleasing the majority is better than
pleasing the minority, i don't understand what other arbitrary value
trumps that of electing the Condorcet winner if such exists.
pathologies can happen in a cycle, but, as i have wondered aloud here
before, i wonder how often it would really happen for a Condorcet
cycle to occur in real elections.
simply, if a Condorcet winner exists, and your election authority
elevates to office someone else, that elected person is rejected by a
majority of the electorate. what other democratic value papers over
that flaw? LNH? monotonicity?
like the popular vote is the gold standard we use to judge how well
the Electoral College does, it seems to me that the Condocet
criterion is the gold standard to use to judge how well some other
method works. in both cases it seems logical to ditch the
"experimental" method and just use the gold standard.
--
r b-j r...@audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
