Curt, --- Curt Siffert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Take each candidate and put them in a head-to-head matchup with every > other candidate. For each candidate, find the head-to-head matchup > where the candidate has the most votes against them (even if they win > that matchup). Record that number. > > Do that for every candidate. The candidate that has the smallest > number is the winner.
I'm happy with this version. > Seems like a pretty weird method to me. And it doesn't seem like it > would always select a Condorcet Winner if it exists. When this rule is used even with partial rankings, this is what I call "MinMax (pairwise opposition)" or "MMPO." It fails Condorcet, but not too badly, I'd say. An advantage of this method is that it satisfies Later-no-harm: Adding lower preferences to a ranking can't harm any higher preferences. For that reason I think it's a good three-candidate method. (The MinMax clone problem kicks in beyond three candidates.) Kevin Venzke __________________________________________________________________ Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 250 Mo d'espace de stockage pour vos mails ! Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com/ ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info