Majority criterion: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1:
{{wikipedia|Majority favorite criterion}}
 
The '''majority favorite criterion''' is a criterion for evaluating [[voting system]]s. It can be most simply thought of as "if a majority prefers a candidate aswould theirget unique>50% 1stof choicethe (i.e.[[FPP]] theyvote, prefer thisthat candidate aboveshould allwin". In other candidates)words, thenif thea majority's selects a candidate as their unique 1st choice, this candidate must win."
 
It can be stated as follows:
 
{{definition|If a majority of the voters endorse a given candidate X more than any other candidate, then X must win.}}
 
Or in plain English as
 
{{Definition| If one candidate is preferred by a majority (more than 50%) of voters, then that candidate must win}}
 
<br />
 
== Example ==
Line 29 ⟶ 19:
The [[mutual majority criterion]], which is sometimes simply called the majority criterion, generalizes the constraint to sets of candidates.
 
The [[Condorcet criterion]] implies the majority criterion.  
 
=== Weaker forms of the criterion ===
Line 42 ⟶ 32:
The difference between the two versions can be seen with this example:<blockquote>51 A:1
 
49 B:5</blockquote>If the highest score is a 5, then the majority criterion for rated ballots allows either A or B to win. This is in contrast to the regular majority criterion, which requires A to win. Arguably, the majority criterion for rated ballots is more appropriate in the context of rated ballots, since a voter who doesn't give their 1st choice a perfect score is essentially choosing not to use all of their voting power, and thus their preference need not be (or even perhaps, shouldn't) be maximally respected or enforced.   
 
== Notes ==
Line 66 ⟶ 56:
=== Independence of irrelevant alternatives ===
The majority criterion implies failure of the [[Independence of irrelevant alternatives]] criterion; see the [[Condorcet paradox]] for an example.
 
 
== Majority rule as an approximation of utilitarianism ==