Hallo,
the Condorcet criterion and the later-no-harm criterion
are incompatible. Therefore, the fact that Debian's Condorcet
method violates the later-no-harm criterion doesn't come
from the order of its checks.
Markus Schulze
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
paper:
http://m-schulze.webhop.net/schulze1.pdf
Markus Schulze
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-vote-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
, Markus?
Yes. You are absolutely correct.
Markus Schulze
all options (other than the default option) because
of the quorum requirement then so does my proposal.
Markus Schulze
to change his
mind_. On the other side, the winner according to my proposal would still
be candidate D.
In my opinion, this is a disadvantage of Manoj's May 15 proposal because
this means that Manoj's May 15 proposal leads to unnecessarily frequent
changes of the status quo.
Markus Schulze
when the voters don't change their minds.
Markus Schulze
proposal would choose A.
Markus Schulze
majority requirement and is dropped.
B and A are the only remaining options, and B defeats A.
B wins.
That's strange! The majority requirement makes the default
option lose. Doesn't that contradict the intention of the
majority requirement?
Markus Schulze
.
Markus Schulze (not Martin Schulze)
Dear Raul,
you wrote (25 May 2003):
Markus Schulze wrote (25 May 2003):
I suggest that one should at first calculate the ranking of
the candidates according to the beat path method and then,
of those candidates whose beat path to the default option
meets the quorum, that candidate should
other candidate and
who rank all the other candidates equally must not change
candidate A into a loser.
Markus Schulze
:144
E:F=211:99
Candidate D is the unique beat path winner.
This example demonstrates that the extreme violation of
the participation criterion has nothing to do with quorum
requirements.
Markus Schulze
is C
and the quorum is 207. Then the winner is candidate D.
Markus Schulze
Dear Manoj,
the Floyd algorithm to calculate the beat paths from
each candidate to each other candidate looks as follows
(Markus Schulze; 17 Oct 2002):
for (i : = 1; i = NumberOfCandidates; i++)
for (j : = 1; j = NumberOfCandidates; j++)
for (k : = 1; k = NumberOfCandidates; k
transitively defeats C AND C does
not transitively defeat D.
Markus Schulze
candidate with winner(i) = true,
the elector with the casting vote picks the winner from all
the candidates with winner(i) = true.
Markus Schulze
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
candidate with winner(i) = true,
the elector with the casting vote picks the winner from all
the candidates with winner(i) = true.
Markus Schulze
" proposal
is very weak. Even proposals that are Pareto-inferior to
the Status Quo (**) can be "available" due to the above
mentioned definition. But this is not a problem at least
as long as the used Condorcet method guarantees that such
a proposal cannot be chosen.
Markus Schulze
(**
definition. But this is not a problem at least
as long as the used Condorcet method guarantees that such
a proposal cannot be chosen.
Markus Schulze
(**) Proposal Z is Pareto-inferior to the Status Quo
means that every voter strictly prefers the Status Quo
to proposal Z.
19 matches
Mail list logo