[EM] Schulze's method fails Condorcet's Criterion, right?

[Markus Schulze]

Dear Mike,

you wrote (3 Dec 2000):
> Much simpler, much more justified. Here's how I write Condorcet's
> Criterion:
>
> If there's a sincere CW, and if everyone votes sincerely, then that
> sincere CW should win.
>
> A voter votes sincerely if he doesn't vote a preference that isn't
> a sincere preference, and if he doesn't leave unvoted a sincere
> preference that the balloting system in use would have allowed him
> to vote in addition to the preferences that he actually voted.
>
> [end of definition]

1. You forgot to define the term "sincere CW."

2. How does your definition of "sincerity" look like when the
   used election method allows the voter to cast more than just
   preferences? Example: When Average Rating or Median Rating or
   Cumulative Voting is used, then how has a voter to vote to be
   "sincere"?

Markus Schulze