that claim, but
if it's wrong please do fix it. Markus S - I'm very surprised that
IIA does not imply ICC, could you give an example? I mean the strong
version of IIA.
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ www.ciphergoth.org
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
otherwise be a
nondeterministically resolved tie, to say that if A does better than
two alternatives and both alternatives do better than C then that's
enough information to resolve the tie in favour of A B1 B2 C?
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ www.ciphergoth.org
Election-methods mailing list
. Swapping these two is therefore bound to produce an ordering
with a better sorted affirmed list; therefore a list that does not
meet this criterion cannot be the winning list.
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ www.ciphergoth.org
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 10:39:57 +, Paul Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:33:19 +0100, Markus Schulze
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Paul,
your Condorcet/RP variant sounds like Steve Eppley's
minimize thwarted majorities (MTM) method.
For each of the n! possible
On Fri, 5 Nov 2004 13:33:03 +, Paul Crowley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 04 Nov 2004 21:33:19 +0100, Markus Schulze
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
your Condorcet/RP variant sounds like Steve Eppley's
minimize thwarted majorities (MTM) method.
MTM is exactly equivalent to my method
the
subsequence a l q a e d a in that order, and that
pundits will thus conclude that it's a terrorist plot. Let's look for
a method that really seems good according to the things we really care
about first, and worry about selling it second.
--
__
\/ o\ Paul Crowley
/\__/ www.ciphergoth.org
