Condorect sub-cycle rule

[Markus Schulze]

Dear David,

you wrote (26 Sep 1997):
>He breaks the ABC cycle first, which leads to problems. Note that the 
>method if not 'fair', in the sense that it depends on the order in 
>which the options are listed.

No! Smith//Condorcet[EM] with the subcycle rule doesn't depend on the
order in which the options are listed. I just called the candidates
of the subcycle A, B, and C.

**********************************************************************

By the way, I agree with your statement, that the strongest defeats
should be considered successively until a cycle occurs.

[Remark: This is Tideman's interpretation of Condorcet's wordings.
The successive elimination of weakest defeats is Young's
interpretation of Condorcet's wordings. Tideman's method is the
only method, that meets the Modified Independence from
Irrelevant Alternatives Criterion (MIIAC), the Generalized
Independence from Twins Criterion (GITC), the Generalized Majority
Criterion (GMC), and Pareto simultaneously.]

Markus Schulze (schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de)