Hi, --- En date de : Jeu 14.7.11, Kristofer Munsterhjelm <[email protected]> a écrit : > 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".
I'm inclined to lump this in with IIA problems more generally. It seems to tend to be the case that raising the winner adjusted the method's perceived relative strengths of other candidates, with unpredictable results. I think I will try implementing the "eliminate the pairwise loser of the most distant pair" method. I am curious how well it would discourage burial. I wonder also how often it would fail Plurality... Kevin ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
