[EM] Condorcet cyclic drop rule

Blake Cretney bcretney at postmark.net
Tue Apr 3 08:40:09 PDT 2001

On Tue, 03 Apr 2001 01:24:28 -0000
"MIKE OSSIPOFF" <nkklrp at hotmail.com> wrote:

> From what Blake said, maybe Condorcet meant margins, since margins
> seem more what one would use for judging which propositions are more
> likely to be objectively true, something that Condorcet expressed
> in estimating.

Here's another issue, then.  At one time, people on this list used the
term "Condorcet's method" to mean choosing the candidate whose
greatest defeat was least (Minmax).  Of course, based on the confusion
we have recently been discussing, this was defined using
"defeat-support" instead of margins.  My impression is that it was you
who claimed that this method is what Condorcet intended, but I might
be wrong.

At one time, I suspected that you had taken Condorcet's words out of
context.  That he had said, take the candidate whose greatest defeat
is least, when referring to a three candidate example, and you had
extrapolated it to all examples.  I have read a great deal of
Condorcet, and I can't find even this kind of statement.  Can you give
me the quote on which the minmax interpretation was based?   This
question is open to anyone, not just Mike.

I note that Rob Lanphier still uses "Condorcet's method" with the
minmax meaning.

Blake Cretney

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list