I'm sorry, I should have said "pairwise-comparison" methods. I consider
most pairwise-comparison methods to be Condorcet-like, even if they have a
different completion method than suggested by Condorcet. I was just
emphasizing that the Borda count, which gives points based on a candidates
ranking (and which does *not* always select the Condorcet winner), can be
used iteratively to find Condorcet winners and losers with a completely
different method. *And* it gives a single winner/loser even if the
candidates are in a circular tie.
Mike Rouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 10:37 PM 7/2/2001 +0200, you wrote:
>Dear Michael,
>
>you wrote (1 July 2001):
> > Nanson's method -- which calculates the Borda score for each candidate,
> > drops the lowest, then recalculates -- can be proven to always find the
> > Condorcet winner if one exist. It is one of few non-Condorcet methods
> > with this property.
>
>What is a "Condorcet method" due to your use of this term?
>
>Markus Schulze
