On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 11:28 PM, Richard Fobes < [email protected]> wrote:
> On 4/23/2012 12:05 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote: > >> On 04/22/2012 05:07 PM, Richard Fobes wrote: >> >> The core of the system is VoteFair popularity ranking, which is >>> mathematically equivalent to the Condorcet-Kemeny method, which is >>> one of the methods supported by the "Declaration of Election-Method >>> Reform Advocates." >>> >> >> You said there are ballot sets for which the Kemeny method and VoteFair >> provides different winners. How, then, can VoteFair be /mathematically/ >> equivalent? You say the differences don't matter in practice, but for >> the method to be mathematically equivalent, wouldn't the mapping have to >> be completely identical? >> > > First of all, in the context of a publication that is read by > non-mathematicians (which is what the Democracy Chronicles is) the word > "equivalent" does not refer to a rigorous "sameness." > When you qualify it as "mathematically equivalent", it definitely does refer to a rigorous "sameness". Perhaps you should say "essentially equivalent". ~ Andy
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
