Dear Nathanael, Raul Miller wrote (25 May 2003): > Correct me if I'm wrong, but: what Manoj's May 15 proposal > implements logically equivalent to your suggestion?
I wrote (25 May 2003): > 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. You wrote (25 May 2003): > Let me apply this to my evil testcase. :-) > > 19x A=DB > 19x ABD > 1x BA=D > > A defeats B by 38 to 1 > A defeats D by 19 to 0 > B defeats D by 20 to 19. > > On the A->B->D defeat path, A defeats D with 20 positive > votes at the weakest link, which makes quorum, and A wins. > > Yep, this fixes the perverse result I was talking about in > another thread (where Manoj's proposal causes B to win). > Am I correct, Markus? Yes. You are absolutely correct. Markus Schulze