Monotonicity (Voting Theory)
An explanation of the Monotonicity criterion for social choice and voting theory.
Sponsors: Prince Otchere, Daniel Helland, Dennis Sexton, Will Roberts and √2. Thanks for your support!
Donate on Patreon: / carneades
Buy stuff with Zazzle: www.zazzle.com/carneades
Follow us on Twitter: @CarneadesCyrene / carneadescyrene
Information for this video gathered from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy and more!
Information for this video gathered from The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy and more!
Пікірлер: 4
so instant runoff doesn't necessarily break monotonicity, only in specific cases. In that case, since there's a finite number of possible ballots for voters a through m, that being 6 ballots time to the power of 13 voters, so 13060694016 scenarios, how many of those would break monotonicity? I would argue there's a difference between very specific contrived examples breaking monotonicity and a sizable number of possible scenarios breaking monotonicity
2:32 Wait, are you telling me that Alternate Voting doesn't respect monotonicity just because there are only 13 voters? What are the chances of two candidates having the *exact* same number of votes? Sure, remembet not to use Alternate Voting in small assemblies, but I'm quite sure than in national elections you will only have to eliminate one candidate per turn ahah Jokes apart, am I correct? Does Alternate Voting still work for national elections? At the very least you could always determine a system that only eliminates one candidate per turn (for example this case's O-P tie could be solved by only counting O vs P votes across all voters, i.e. 9-4 for O, eliminating P).
Oh my god you ruined my favorite voting system.
*if B were