Dear Curt! You wrote: > 1) Are there cases where you would consider a candidate outside the > Schwartz set to be the proper winner? > 2) Are there cases where you would consider a candidate outside the > Smith set to be the proper winner?
Yes, definitely: When x,y,z<n/2, then in the sincere situation x A>>D>B>C y B>>D>C>A z C>>D>A>B the winner should be one of A,B,C, with probability x/n, y/n, z/n, respectively, since D is not approved by anyone. DFC (Democratic Fair Choice) gives this result! > 3) In a two candidate race, if 51% mildly preferred A to B, and 49% > passionately preferred B to A, who should win? That's very difficult since we cannot really compare intersubjectively how passionately one is. But at least with the sincere votes 51 A>B, both approved 49 B>>A, only B approved, I guess that the approval winner B has an equal claim to win than the majority winner A. DFC takes this into account by electing A with 51% probability and B with 49% probability! > I was surprised to find out that some of you might say "B". If that is > true, then I find the discussion emphasis on Condorcet tiebreakers kind > of odd. I perfectly agree with you! Yours, Jobst ______________________________________________________________ Verschicken Sie romantische, coole und witzige Bilder per SMS! Jetzt bei WEB.DE FreeMail: http://f.web.de/?mc=021193 ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info