Mr. Ossipoff wrote in part- Can we just agree that Condorcet wasn't as specific as we'd have liked , and leave it at that? I'm more interested in what methods meet criteria that measure for standards that I consider important, and I suggest that you address that subject, and drop the issue of what Condorcet meant. --- D- Trying to decipher Condorcet's comments is like trying to decipher *ALL* of the comments in the Bible or Koran--- a very difficult task. Who is trying to win debating points with gotchas ??? (Since I brought up the 1997 discussion regarding some confusion about what Condorcet wrote as noted recently by Mr. Schulze). With 3 or more choices there may be divided majorities with *SOME* sort of strategy *WHATEVER* method is being used. Which method(s) are understandable by John/ Mary Q. Voter in the real political world (and will not cause their brains to become too scrambled dealing with strategy and sincere/ insincere votes) ???