Just to clarify what I meant for my suggestion, my chicken-dilemma-free suggestion would be this:
Do a rank-balloting among all of the options, with D as one of the options.. Do a Schwartz Woodall count.among all the options. If D wins, or if the winner loses pairwise to D, or if the wnner doesn't beat D by the required supermajority ratio, or if number of voters doesn't meet the global voting quorum, then have further discussion, and later vote again. Otherwise, declare the winner as the chosen option. Just one more thing: One reason why I've been advocating Schwartz Woodal (along with Woodall and Benham) is because, in official public government elections, the chicken dilemma _would_ be a problem, or at least a serious nuisance that would demand special strategy, and would take away the freedom from strategy-need that Condorcet methods could ideally have. Ii consider official public government elections to be where we seriously need a better voting system. I believe that it would make all the difference. I realize that Debian is an international organization, and this this forum is for duscussing Debian voting matters, and so what follows in this post is off-topic. But I just want to explain why I consider it important to advocate better voting systems. The Green Party U.S. (GPUS) offers Instant Runoff (IRV) in its platform. I know that Debian is an international organization, but of course my main goal has been reforms in the U,.S. It seems to me that any reform in the U.S. must start with the election of Greens to office. IRV, like Woodall, Benham, and Schwartz Woodall, meets the Mutual Majority Criterion, and has no chicken dilemma. But of course IRV fails the Condorcet Criterion. IRV's failure to always elect the Condorcet winner compromise makes IRV too uncompromising and inimical for amicable organizations. It also makes IRV vulnerable to replacement by a dis-satisfied majority, when IRV is used in official public government elections. So, I feel that, if the GPUS were elected here, and IRV were established as the voting system, there might soon be majority wishes to replace IRV with a Condorcet-complying voting system. A good Condorcet-complying replacement would be Benham, Woodall, or Schwartz Woodall. That gives me incentive to advocate Schwartz Woodall for organizations, because it's the kind of voting system that would likely be eventually adopted in a Green U.S. So I'm just telling my motivation to advocate Schwartz Woodall, even to organizations that don't really have a chicken dilemma. Of course (at least if there's a chicken dilemma), Schwartz Woodall's combination of the Mutual Majority Criterion, no chicken dilemma, and the Condorcet Criterion would make it the a good choice (the best choice, I claim) for organizational voting. Of course obviously, if Debian doesn't have a chicken dilemma, there's no need for Debian to change its voting system from CSSD to Schwartz Woodall. Michael Ossipoff -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/caokdy5bgjhx0fgmlsz+ywb330zgrfad9runik+1nbn+oo+7...@mail.gmail.com
