>Craig Carey wrote: > > > > I ask people that post to state their position on truncation >resistance. > > This asked to all subscribed, provided they post a lot or they want >to > > make a statement on this (yes/no) question. > > [...] What you wrote isn't what I consider a definition of truncation resistance. It does sound like something that Steve & maybe Blake spoke of as advantages of Tideman over BeatpathWinner. Truncation resistance means that truncation can't steal victory from a sincere CW who is ranked over the truncators' candidate by a majority of all the voters. It can't make the truncators' candidate win. The trouble with Truncation Resistance as a criterion is that it's only useful for comparing pairwise-count methods. That's one reason why I wrote SFC, and why Steve wrote GSFC. By the way, Blake said that, for any method, complete freedom from need for strategy is unattainable. That's true, but it's also true that freedom from need for strategy can be guaranteed under plausible conditions, and that's what SFC & GSFC do. Mike Ossipoff _________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com. Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.
