> Power never falls into a state where the majority party can stay in control.
That usually only happens when power gained by elections is used to change the system, often outside of the formal rules of change. Obviously, no election system can safeguard against this, since it is an effect outside of the electoral system.
> Every vote counts.
Only one vote counts. This is literally the textbook example of a system than fails the non-dictatorship criterion.
> Extreme minority votes still matter
Well, again, since only one vote matters, it's only an extreme minority of votes that matters, but it's extremely unlikely to be one from an extreme minority position.
> Only one vote counts. This is literally the textbook example of a system than fails the non-dictatorship criterion.
This depends on how you state the non-dictatorship criterion. Wikipedia's discussion refers to a "single pre-determined person's preferences." But since the dictator is selected randomly, they aren't pre-determined.
Further, every vote counts in the sense that every additional vote for a candidate increases the odds of them winning the election. The candidate has an incentive to get additional votes no matter how many votes they currently have. You don't have the situation where its futile to vote because the outcome isn't going to be close.
That usually only happens when power gained by elections is used to change the system, often outside of the formal rules of change. Obviously, no election system can safeguard against this, since it is an effect outside of the electoral system.
> Every vote counts.
Only one vote counts. This is literally the textbook example of a system than fails the non-dictatorship criterion.
> Extreme minority votes still matter
Well, again, since only one vote matters, it's only an extreme minority of votes that matters, but it's extremely unlikely to be one from an extreme minority position.