Markus, --- Markus Schulze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit : > you wrote (2 Sep 2003): > > I think MCA meets Clone Independence and Participation, > > but I'd like to hear reasoning to the contrary.
I agree that the below shows a failure of Clone Independence in the method as it was described by John. I assume you'd agree that Clone Independence is passed if the number of ranks is fixed (not based on the number of candidates), and it is permissible to leave ranks empty. Thanks for such a quick response. Kevin Venzke [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Situation 1: > > 2 A > B > C > 3 B > C > A > 4 C > A > B > > The winner is candidate C. > > Situation 2: > > Replacing C by C1, C2, and C3 gives: > > 2 A > B > C2 > C1 > C3 > 3 B > C3 > C2 > C1 > A > 4 C1 > C2 > C3 > A > B > > The winner is candidate B. ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en français ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
