Talk:Mutual majority criterion

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Elections and Referendums This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

I replaced MCA with Bucklin for two reasons. 1. MCA is a type of Bucklin. 2. Three-slot methods can't satisfy MMC as worded here. KVenzke 15:05, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

Has this criterion been used "in the literature", and if so where? Who first used the term? CRGreathouse (talk | contribs) 06:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess Mike Ossipoff or someone he was in contact with coined the term. It was referenced by James Green-Armytage in an article in Voting Matters. Douglas Woodall uses "Majority" to refer to this criterion. I'm certain he used it (the criterion, not this name) in "Monotonicity of single-seat preferential election rules", Discrete Applied Mathematics 77 (1997), pp. 81–98. KVenzke 15:12, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Am I right in thinking that this, like the majority criterion and the Condorcet criterion, is one of those criteria that can be worded in several ways (all of them equivalent for rank-order ballots), and whether Approval passes it depends on which wording you take?Jack Rudd (talk) 22:08, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]