Chris,
--- Chris Benham <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> That of course should have been:
> The "pairwise version" says that X must not win if there are more
> voters that rank Y above all the other candidates than there are voters
> that rank X over *any* candidate.
I should say first of all that I didn't realize you *were* describing a
pairwise version, which is why I responded as though you were paraphrasing
Woodall. I'm really not sure what "rank Y above all the other candidates"
means if not first preferences, though.
> Kevin,
> I'm a bit confused by your response.
>
> >the "pairwise"
> >version can't refer to first preferences or "any" preferences. It just says
> >that if the greatest number of votes against X in some contest exceeds the
> >greatest number for X in some contest, then X mustn't win.
> >
> Shouldn't the second of your three "X"s be a Y? Otherwise, in the
> 49A, 24B, 27C>B example both A and C would be barred by it.
The "pairwise" version that I know of doesn't use a Y, and both A and C
are actually barred by it.
This criterion is probably known by a different name...
Kevin Venzke
_____________________________________________________________________________
Découvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail : 1 Go d'espace de stockage pour vos mails,
photos et vidéos !
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.mail.yahoo.com
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
