Thank you for than information, Steve and Bart,
Both sets of data seem to confirm that the non-existance of a sincere
condorcet winner is not "probable". I would say: in a condorcet
election, if there happen to be several contenders, then the non
existance of a condorcet winner is a definate poss
Anthony Duff asked:
> I am interested in the question of the frequency
> of non-existence of a sincere CW. I personally
> do not know that it is probable.
Here's another reason to occasionally expect
sincere cycles at the top, when we're electing
candidates to offices: Candidates want to win!
Anthony Duff wrote:
>
> I am interested in the question of the frequency of non-existance of
> a sincere CW. I personally do not know that it is probable.
In Merrill, "Making Multicandidate...", in the table on p.24, he shows
frequency of sincere CW for 5 candidates under a random society
simul
Warren,
In both scenarios you have assumed a cyclic property of the
electorate in order to demonstrate a cyclic result. You therefore
are not demonstrating very much.
Anthony
--- Warren Schudy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, [iso-8859-1] Anthony Duff wrote:
> > I am inter
On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, [iso-8859-1] Anthony Duff wrote:
> I am interested in the question of the frequency of non-existance of
> a sincere CW. I personally do not know that it is probable.
Here are two scenarios where the classic 3-voter 3-candidate Condorcet
cycle arises naturally. They are bot
Jobst wrote in part...
> ... as there is no
> sincere CW (which is quite probable as we know!). This is because
> whatever candidate A gets elected, there is always a majority
> prefering some B who can elect B by voting "B > all others" without
> there being any counter-strategy to this threat.
