EM list-- Sorry, I made another error. In some of the situations that I checked, for 0-info pairwise strategy, I forgot to consider pair-votes in both directions. You must be tired of my errors, but I'd checked for small omissions, and I didn't realize that I'd made a big one, and I was fairly sure that I'd done it right. What I must do, when I make a determination like that, especially something controversial, is wait a few days, during which I check on it several times, persistently looking for a way it could be wrong. Anyway, when the Margins determination is done right, I suppose the terms affected by truncation will cancel eachother, and, in keeping with common sense, Margins won't have 0-info incentive to do other than rank sincerely, as Blake said. If I considered that important, I'd be a Margins fan myself. I won't mention Margins' 0-info strategy again unless I'm _sure_ it has incentive for doing other than ranking sincerely. Since I missed considering some of the pair-votes in both directions, which matters in Condorcet in the consideration of near BeatsAll winners, my figure for the Ub needed to make it desirable to rank B equal to A is probably off too. Maybe it will even turn out to be .5, as Blake suggested. When I find out, I'll briefly tell what the figure is here, but only when I'm really sure. I wanted to study Condorcet's 0-info strategy because others have brought it up, and Blake was using it as a criticism of Condorcet. Of course my checking of my results before posting them hasn't been thorough enough, and I'm aware of that. Mike Ossipoff ______________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
