[EM] Further comments re: Blake's letter

Markus Schulze schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de
Tue Apr 17 05:45:25 PDT 2001

Dear Mike,

you wrote (16 Apr 2001):
> I should add that, of the 4 list-members that I named (5 if you
> count me), all but one also prefer BeatpathWinner to Ranked-Pairs.

It isn't clear what you mean with "BeatpathWinner." Due to the usual
way, in which new terms are created out of old terms in this mailing
list, the "BeatpathWinner" seems to be the winner of the Beatpath
Criterion Method. This method has been proposed by Steve Eppley in
Feb 2000

> Here's another good method which is not equivalent to Tideman or 
> Schulze:
>    Beatpath Criterion Method (BCM)
>    -------------------------------
>    For all pairs i&j,
>    if Vij > Vji and Vij > Bji then eliminate j.

However, I don't remember that Norman Petry, Rob Lanphier or I have
said that we prefer this method.

I also observe that the term "BeatpathWinner" hasn't been used
before 2000, when Steve Eppley introduced his Beatpath Criterion.
Therefore it seems to me that your usage of the term "BeatpathWinner"
is possibly caused by the fact that you probably mixed up some of
Steve Eppley's concepts with some of my concepts.

Markus Schulze

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list