Revision as of 08:41, 22 December 2019 (view source) BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk \| contribs) mNo edit summary ← Older edit		Revision as of 15:41, 10 February 2020 (view source) BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk \| contribs) mNo edit summary Tag: Visual edit Newer edit →
Line 118: ~~It has not been proven whether CPO-STV is proportional for Droop solid coalitions.~~ It has not been proven whether CPO-STV is proportional for Droop solid coalitions. However, if it can be, then its cycle resolution method likely must choose from the [[Smith set\|Smith Set]] of winner sets in order to do so, as Smith-efficiency guarantees Droop proportionality (the [[Mutual majority criterion\|mutual majority]] criterion) in the single-winner case.

CPO-STV: Difference between revisions

CPO-STV (view source)