Re: Condorcet Voting and Supermajorities (Re: [CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT] Disambiguation of 4.1.5)

[Anthony Towns]

On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 08:44:26AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 01, 2000 at 06:54:32AM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > > > > However, with the 3:1 supermajority which affects A, you get:
> > > > > 10    : 0  B:C
> > > > >  3 1/3: 0  A:B
> > > > >  3 1/3: 0  A:C
> > > > > B wins.
> Mechanism.. how do I explain that I'm talking about the
> mechanism itself..?

I'm not sure what you're talking about because in the above, A wins.
(It's the Condorcet winner, so all Condorcet methods select it)

Whatever method you're applying, you've either got a bad description of
it, or you're doing something wrong.

(Any method that declares B the winner is obviously broken beyond repair;
but Condorcet methods don't do that)

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

     ``Thanks to all avid pokers out there''
                       -- linux.conf.au, 17-20 January 2001


--  
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]