Markus wrote: >Gore and Nader are no clones in your example. They would have been clones >only when this example had looked as follows: > >Bush 49% >Gore>Nader 24% >Nader>Gore 27%
Fair enough: I guess my point is that Nader is also not an irrelevant alternative, neither in the strict sense nor even in the local sense. >Whether independence from clones is violated has nothing to do with >whether "winning votes" or "margins" are being used. Yes, both beatpath and ranked pairs (Schulze and Tideman) are clone-independent regardless of whether you evaluate defeat strength using winning votes or margins. -Adam ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
