Chris: You wrote:
...your definition of MMT doesn't make clear that a "majority candidate set" may contain only one candidate. [endquote] My definition doesn't say anything about how many candidates a majority candidate set may or must contain. That means that a majority candidate set may contain any number of candidates, and that includes one. You continued: Given that this uses 3-slot ballots, isn't it just (interpreting any above-Bottom rating as approval) "Majority Approval//Top Ratings"? *If no candidate is majority-approved elect the most top-rated candidate. Otherwise elect the most top-rated majority-approved candidate.* [endquote] No. That is not a rewording of my definition. It is not equivalent to my definition. Your different wording has a different meaning, and quite different results. You continued: But of course that fails Later-no-Harm, because it could be that if some voters vote A truncate then no candidate will have majority approval and A wins but if they vote A>B then B will have majority approval and the win will change to B. [end quote] Quite so. Mike Ossipoff ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info