Re: Questions about Majority-Beat vs Plurality-Beat Condorcet
Kevin Venzke via Election-Methods <[email protected]> Sun, 5 Apr 2026 22:20:52 +0000 (UTC)
| Newsgroups | gmane.politics.election-methods |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi Toby, I think it must not be the same criterion. It doesn't seem like Moulin's incompatibility proof assumes determinism. I see on the Talk page Markus has helpfully linked it, or his interpretation of it: http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2003-October/011042.html I don't know how to compute the Maximal Lotteries method to try the proof, though. Kevin votingmethods.net Le dimanche 5 avril 2026 à 08:29:27 UTC−5, Toby Pereira <[email protected]> a écrit : > > My understanding was that Maximal Lotteries (a non-deterministic Condorcet method) did pass participation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximal_lotteries > > Toby > > On Saturday, 4 April 2026 at 01:16:10 BST, Kevin Venzke via Election-Methods <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> >> Definitely not. Very few methods satisfy Participation, certainly not ones that >> resemble Condorcet. The most complicated Participation methods are DAC and DSC. >> >> >> Kevin >> votingmethods.net ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list info