Maximize Affirmed Majorities: Difference between revisions

m
Change "is the Schulze." to "is the Schulze method."
(→‎External Resources: fixing link to "Maximum Majority Voting" page on https://RadicalCentrism.org (and linking to the archived copy on archive.org))
m (Change "is the Schulze." to "is the Schulze method.")
Line 21:
Two other voting methods that can be considered close variations of MAM are [[Maximum Majority Voting]] (MMV) and River.
 
One of the main "competing" Condorcet methods is the [[Schulze method|Schulze]]. Many of the criteria listed above that are satisfied by MAM are also satisfied by Schulze. But not local independence of irrelevant alternatives, nor immunity from majority complaints. (Schulze also fails a weaker immunity criterion, immunity from second place complaints, which requires that the candidate that would win if the winner were deleted must not be ranked over the winner by a majority.) When there are three or fewer candidates, MAM and Schulze always elect the same candidate. When there are four or more candidates, computer simulations independently designed by Norm Petry and Steve Eppley have shown that majorities prefer MAM winners over Schulze winners more often than vice versa.
 
== Procedure ==
1,202

edits