Alex, I hope I understood what you meant. When you say that the three candidates each have "well-defined stances on a variety of issues," I believe you're only saying that to make it clear that the voters are rational in holding cyclic preferences.
I have two thoughts. For a candidate to become the CW, he needs to be able to move on the spectrum. But if it's not possible for the three candidates to move, because there are only a few, well-defined positions that can be taken on the issue(s), then it's hopeless. A candidate needs to have some other currency to offer. He needs another dimension on the spectrum to allow him to move towards the voter median. Suppose the only issue is what sort of film to watch: drama, comedy, or documentary. A candidate stands for each. None of them can become the CW unless they can also make an issue of what to eat afterwards, let's say, or who gets to sit next to whom, or who will not be invited next time if they don't submit. My other thought is to use Approval: Make every voter decide, secretly, with the results revealed simultaneously, whether they insist on their favorite, or insist against their least favorite. But if there really are only three voters, this won't work either. Roll dice, or introduce another issue (the reason we don't see many cyclic ties in legislatures). Kevin Venzke [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? -- Une adresse @yahoo.fr gratuite et en fran�ais ! Yahoo! Mail : http://fr.mail.yahoo.com ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
