[EM] maybe a new variant of Condorcet

[Chris Benham]

peter barath wrote (18/04/2007):

>I call a subset of candidates a quasi-clone set, if:
>
>1. they don't make up the whole set of candidates
>2. for every candidate out of the set they are in
>the same winning relation with (all beat / all tie /
>all lose)
>
>(You can ask why to make the subsets at all, but I think
>this Rubicon is already crossed with the Smith-set,
>which is a special kind of quasi-clone sets.)
>  
>

This is similar to Forest Simmons'  "beat clone sets" he uses in his 
Dec. 2004
"sprucing up" process idea.

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014325.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014326.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014328.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014330.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014331.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014354.html

http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-December/014337.html

Chris Benham


Markus Schulze wrote:

>Dear Peter Barath,
>
>your proposal is very similar to Mike Ossipoff's subcycle rule.
>Please read:
>
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/1996-June/000494.html
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/1996-June/000532.html
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/1996-July/000572.html
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/1997-September/001532.html
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/1998-June/001721.html
>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2005-February/014707.html
>
>Markus Schulze
>  
>