On 14 Mar 2005 at 07:10 PST, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> Dear Jobst,
>
> --- Jobst Heitzig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Dear Ted!
>> > Basically, the idea is simply Beatpath: Break each cycle at the weakest
>> > link.
>> > But what should be the weakest link? Why not call it the defeat made by
>> > t
Dear Jobst,
--- Jobst Heitzig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Dear Ted!
> > Basically, the idea is simply Beatpath: Break each cycle at the weakest
> > link.
> > But what should be the weakest link? Why not call it the defeat made by the
> > candidate with lowest approval? We could call this Tota
Jobst Heitzig heitzig-j-at-web.de |EMlist| wrote:
Dear Ted!
You wrote:
Thanks to both of your responses, I have an idea now that I think will work,
and it should have (my) desired quality of encouraging generous approval
cutoff and ranking of candidates below the cutoff.
Basically, the idea is simp
Dear Ted!
You wrote:
> Thanks to both of your responses, I have an idea now that I think will work,
> and it should have (my) desired quality of encouraging generous approval
> cutoff and ranking of candidates below the cutoff.
>
> Basically, the idea is simply Beatpath: Break each cycle at the
Dear Ted!
You wrote:
> At first, I didn't understand what Frest meant by 'transitive, but I gather
> what he mans is, start a chain by adding the first candidate from the sorted
> list (Call that candidate A_i), to the new chain (call that B_j). When adding
> a new candidate, start at the winning
Ted Stern tedstern-at-mailinator.com |EMlist| wrote:
Thanks to both of your responses, I have an idea now that I think will work,
and it should have (my) desired quality of encouraging generous approval
cutoff and ranking of candidates below the cutoff.
Basically, the idea is simply Beatpath: Brea
On 12 Mar 2005 at 02:20 PST, Jobst Heitzig wrote:
> Dear Forest!
>
> You [Forest] wrote:
>> Unfortunately, reverse TACC is not monotonic with respect to approval.
>> If the winner moves up to the top approval slot without also becoming
>> the CW, she will turn into a loser.
>
> That's right.
>
>
Dear Forest!
You wrote:
> Unfortunately, reverse TACC is not monotonic with respect to approval.
> If the winner moves up to the top approval slot without also becoming
> the CW, she will turn into a loser.
That's right.
You continued:
> However, the following "chain filling" method is monotoni
