[EM] Re: SSD is BeatpathWinner

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Markus--

You say:

In my opinion, the statement "If p(z)[A,B] > p(z)[B,A], then
candidate B must be elected with zero probability" defines a
_method_ and not a _criterion_ because:

[...]

I reply:

Fine. You don't have to convince me. If you say that that defines Schulze's 
method, then it defines Schulze's method. No argument from me.

You continue:

Therefore, what you call "BeatpathWinner" or "SSD" or "CSSD"
are only different tie-breaking strategies for the Schulze
method that I proposed in 1997.

I reply:

Then you're saying that BeatpathWinner is an instance of Schulze's method. 
How about this method:

MajorityBeatpathWinner:

X has a majorilty beatpath win against Y if there's a majority beatpath from 
X to Y, and the strongest beatpath from X to Y is stronger than the 
strongest beatpath from Y to X.

A candidate wins if no one has a majority beatpath win against him/her.

[end of MajorityBeatpathWinner definition]

This is also an instance of Schulze's method, as you define it above.  
Schulze's method is a very broad family of methods indeed :-)

And that's not even counting the earlier version(s) that used beat-and-tie 
paths instead of beatpaths.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/