Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Weakened sense in which Simmons IS cloneproof

Expand Messages
  • warren_d_smith31
    If you only clone a candidate ONCE (and not twice or more) then Simmons is Cloneproof. ... And Benham remarks (and I agree): So Simmons meets Clone-Loser, but
    Message 1 of 2 , Jan 1, 2007
      If you only clone a candidate ONCE (and not twice or more)
      then Simmons is Cloneproof.

      ----

      And Benham remarks (and I agree):
      So Simmons meets Clone-Loser, but can fail Clone-Winner when there
      are three or more factions
      in a top cycle and the candidates in one of those factions are in a
      sub-cycle. That is a very very mild
      failure of Clone-Independence and arguably not a practical worry.

      If that is the full extent of the bad news (and maybe even if it
      isn't) then I think this method remains a
      great contender (for "best practical Condorcet method") because of its
      tremendous burial resistance
      and simplicity.

      ---

      BUT I still am a bit worried about the possibility Simmons
      could yield a tremendous number of tied-winners, many
      with zero top-rank votes -- or near-zero in which case
      the winner is selected by a very small set of voters.
      (I don't know if that is a practical worry.)

      wds
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.