Woodall's method: Difference between revisions
merge template no longer needed
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (merge template no longer needed) |
|||
Line 14:
Definition of "beats":
{{definition|X beats Y if more ballots rank X over Y than rank Y over X.}}
=== A few properties of Woodall ===
Line 21:
Meeting Smith always implies meeting MMC, and Condorcet Loser as well.
Woodall doesn't meet [[FBC]]. FBC is necessary only under current conditions (dishonest, disinformational media, and an electorate who believe those media). Woodall isn't proposed for current conditions. Likewise for the similar methods proposed later at this page.
Consistency criteria: Woodall, like all Condorcet methods, fails Consistency, Participation, Mono-Add-Top, and Mono-Add-Unique-Top. Woodall fails Mono-Raise, but passes Mono-Add-Plump and Mono-Append.
Woodall's importance comes from its unmatched freedom from strategy-need, made possible by MMC, freedom from chicken dilemma, and CC. Advantages such as that come at a price. The
The consistency criteria don't have strategic importance.
Line 79 ⟶ 78:
It should be pointed out that, of course, if there is a CW, then
Woodall and Benham, by their above-stated definitions, will elect that
CW without doing any IRV.
----
For current conditions (disinformational media and an electorate who
believe those media), [[FBC]] is necessary.
Line 101:
== Schwartz Woodall ==
Schwartz Woodall is a variation of Woodall, and an improvement for
small electorates, such as organizations, meetings or families.
Line 128 ⟶ 126:
3. The Schwartz set is the set of candidates who are in innermost unbeaten sets.}}
[[Category:
[[Category:Condorcet-IRV hybrid methods]]
| |||