Mono-Add-Plump is just a way of saying: There should be no such thing as
self-defeating voting. That would be nice, if achieved by proposably-brief
FBC/ABE methods.
If anyone objects to MMT's Mono-Add-Plump failure, which merely amounts to lack
of protection for poor, self-defeating, strategy; or if anyone objects to the
optional mutuality-requirement available in MTAOC and AOC, one answer is:
If that's the worst strategic criticism that you can make for these methods,
then maybe you should compare it to the strategy problems of methods that
you like more. If that's the worst thing about these methods, then consider
that in the light of other methods' strategy problems.
Another thing that some critics might have missed: In AOC, MTAOC, MCAOC and
AOCBucklin, the mutuality-requirement is optional. You can
make a middle-rating conditional, or not, as you choose.
Can you legitimately criticize it if it's an option? Each person's voting power
is hir own. Each person's approval of any particular candidate is hir own.
Shouldn't s/he be able to give it when and if s/he chooses?
Regarding the methods listed in the paragraph before previous, is there a valid
objection to allowing those ways of voting, ways of using one's
approvals, in an Approval election?
Mike Ossipoff
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
