Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

No, it doesn't say that, either. It says that there is no ranked-ballot voting system that meets a particular set of criteria. (Or, alternatively and perhaps more to the point, it says that the particular set of criteria it sets up are logically mutually contradictory.)

It does say that (about ranked-ballot voting systems), when you consider that each of those criteria does seem a positive attribute of a voting system if nothing else had to be traded away, and which can therefore quite reasonably be viewed as respects in which one voting system can be better than another. It's true that it doesn't apply to scoring systems, but Condorcet's Other Paradox says that no scoring system can be Condorcet consistent so that's a respect in which some ranked ballot voting systems are better in at least one respect than any scoring method.

The general point stands that there is no voting method that dominates every other voting method, but that there can be voting methods that dominate individual other voting methods.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact