On Apr 17, 2010, at 9:25 PM, Markus Schulze wrote:
In my opinion, "Condorcet" refers to a criterion rather than to an election method.
actually Markus, i mostly disagree. "Condorcet", with no other qualification (like Schulze or RP) does not *fully* describe a method because it doesn't specify how it deals with cycles. but cycles don't always happen, and i would bet that they rarely happen in the real world. the ballot evidence in Burlington in 2006 and 2009 show a clear Condorcet ordering of all candidates.
but setting aside for the moment the means of dealing with a cycle (or ties), Condorcet *is* a well-defined method that has a ballot definition (Ranked, as opposed to Score or Approval or the Traditional vote-for-one) and a method of tabulation that is consequently different than others of the same ballot such as STV or Borda or Bucklin. it's not a fully defined method, but enough of it *is* defined to make a meaningful comparison with existing methods such as IRV, Plurality, or delayed runoff.
i realize that with Schulze or Tideman, the method of tabulation and resolution can take place right from the beginning without doing the "generic Condorcet" and then applying Schulze or RP in case of a cycle. i realize that. but without worrying about the cycle, there is a method and it is well defined.
no disrespect intended, i think the Ranked Ballot is the correct ballot (Score requires too much information from the voter causing voter uncertainty in how to mark the ballot, Approval or Traditional overly limits contingency information from the voter, again causing uncertainty in how to mark the ballot to best support a voter's political interest) and a Condorcet-compliant method is the correct way to tabulate the ballots. and among the Condorcet-compliant methods, Schulze is likely the best, but it is *not* the most transparent for the proletariat and any of these non-traditional methods seems to have a problem getting past some persistent ignorance (which is something we continue to struggle with in politics) among voters. but *which* Condorcet-compliant method (among the ones that are reasonably meaningful) continues to appear to be a bit of ivory- tower academic navel gazing. in my opinion. some are better than others, but it's unlikely to make any difference with any frequency in real elections.
just one jaded person's opinion. -- r b-j r...@audioimagination.com "Imagination is more important than knowledge." ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
