Re: [EM] Schulze Method (Markus Schulze)
Kathy Dopp wrote: Markus, Unfortunately I don't have time to study it now, but a quick perusal makes it seem written in a clear, easily-understood style of writing. Am I to assume that this method solves the problem of irrelevant alternatives (the spoiler problem) in all cases unlike both plurality and IRV? I do not know what "clone-independent" means (perhaps I should by now). No rank ballot system can meet IIA while electing an unanimous preferred candidate and having no dictator. (That doesn't mean Schulze is as bad as IRV, though, only that "perfection" cannot be attained.) Clone-independence means that if one adds or removes candidates from a set that all voters vote next to each other (but not necessarily in the same order), that shouldn't cause someone in the set to lose if someone in the set won before the modification, and nor should it cause someone in the set to win if a candidate outside the set won before the modification. Intuitively, it means that a party shouldn't lose (or win) merely by splitting. Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Re: [EM] Schulze Method (Markus Schulze)
Markus, Unfortunately I don't have time to study it now, but a quick perusal makes it seem written in a clear, easily-understood style of writing. Am I to assume that this method solves the problem of irrelevant alternatives (the spoiler problem) in all cases unlike both plurality and IRV? I do not know what "clone-independent" means (perhaps I should by now). Thanks. Kathy > Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2010 22:27:07 +0200 > From: Markus Schulze > To: election-meth...@electorama.com > Subject: [EM] Schulze Method > Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.1.20100918222504.06bd6...@alumni.tu-berlin.de> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > Hallo, > > I have uploaded a new version of my paper > "A New Monotonic, Clone-Independent, ...": > > http://m-schulze.webhop.net/schulze1.pdf > > I have shortened my paper from 167 pages > to 64 pages. The new version is simpler > and more stringent than the old version > (because, in the new version, I use one > and only one heuristic for the Schulze > method). The proofs are simpler because > I moved the random ballot tie-breaker > from section 2 to section 5. > > Markus Schulze > > > Kathy Dopp http://electionmathematics.org Town of Colonie, NY 12304 "One of the best ways to keep any conversation civil is to support the discussion with true facts." Fundamentals of Verifiable Elections http://kathydopp.com/wordpress/?p=174 Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf View some of my research on my SSRN Author page: http://ssrn.com/author=1451051 Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
[EM] Schulze Method
Hallo, I have uploaded a new version of my paper "A New Monotonic, Clone-Independent, ...": http://m-schulze.webhop.net/schulze1.pdf I have shortened my paper from 167 pages to 64 pages. The new version is simpler and more stringent than the old version (because, in the new version, I use one and only one heuristic for the Schulze method). The proofs are simpler because I moved the random ballot tie-breaker from section 2 to section 5. Markus Schulze Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
