SD Smith Compliant

[Norman Petry]

That's good news.  You wrote:

>Every alternative not in the Smith set has a defeat by
>every alternative in the Smith set, which can't be dropped
>because it isn't part of a cycle.

I should have thought of that.  Given that PD satisfies Smith, I'd say we
can safely scrap Condorcet(EM) and Smith//Condorcet(EM).  This leave just
two "best" methods (in no particular order):

- Pairwise Dropping
- Schulze

Use Pairwise Dropping for simplicity, and Schulze for absolute best results.

Now if we could only figure out how to get Schulze to produce ties, so we
could test his tiebreaker...


Norm Petry


-----Original Message-----
From: Mike Ositoff <ntk at netcom.com>
To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
Cc: ntk at netcom.com <ntk at netcom.com>
Date: August 9, 1998 5:54 PM
Subject: SD Smith Compliant


>
>Sequential Dropping complies with Smith, because:
>
>Every alternative not in the Smith set has a defeat by
>every alternative in the Smith set, which can't be dropped
>because it isn't part of a cycle.
>
>Likewise for Non-Sequential Dropping (ND), which says:
>
>Drop every defeat that conflicts with a larger defeat".
>
>Mike
>