2011/7/14 Kristofer Munsterhjelm <[email protected]> > Jameson Quinn wrote: > >> I doubt it's monotonic, though it's probably not a practical problem. That >> is, it would probably be totally impractical to try to use the >> nonmonotonicity for anything strategic, and it wouldn't even lead to Yee >> diagram ugliness. >> > > Nonmonotonicity could be considered an error even with honest voters. The > argument would go something like: "Okay, if we raise X, then X goes from > winner to loser. That means that the method is either wrong about who should > have won in the ballot set before we raised X (it shouldn't have been X), or > after we raised X (it should have been X). We have no way of knowing which > is the 'right' result, and so other results could also be suspect". > > True, but my point was also that the nonmonotonicity of this method would probably be vanishingly improbable.
JQ
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
