Dear Raul, you wrote (25 May 2003): > Markus Schulze wrote (25 May 2003): > > I suggest that one should at first calculate the ranking of > > the candidates according to the beat path method and then, > > of those candidates whose beat path to the default option > > meets the quorum, that candidate should be elected who is > > ranked highest in the ranking of the beat path method. > > That's the maximum that you can get without undermining > > the intention of super-majority requirements. > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but: what Manoj's May 15 proposal > implements logically equivalent to your suggestion?
As far as I have understood Manoj's May 15 proposal correctly, an option is dropped unless it _directly_ defeats the default option with the required quorum. I suggest that it should be sufficient that this option _transitively_ defeats the default option with the required quorum. In Situation 1 in my last mail, the quorum is 38. According to Manoj's May 15 proposal, candidate D is disqualified since only 24 voters strictly prefer candidate D to candidate C. According to my proposal, candidate D is not disqualified since 38 voters strictly prefer candidate E to candidate C and 42 voters strictly prefer candidate D to candidate E. Manoj's May 15 proposal would choose candidate E. In the next elections, when candidate E is the default option, Manoj's May 15 proposal would choose candidate D. My proposal would choose candidate D immediately. In my opinion, the advantage of my proposal is that it doesn't lead to unnecessarily frequent changes of the status quo. Markus Schulze