More Standards

[Mike Ositoff]

Blake proposes a Marginal Majority Criterion, but, except for
the fact that any pairwise proposition can be called a
"majority", his criterion isn't about majority. It's about
margins. It should just be called "Margins Criterion".

Though I've already told why "random fill" isn't a problem,
I'd like to add that in Margins, when nothing is known about
other voters, a voter can gain by random fill. 

He can gain by random fill in Schulze(VA), but he can also
lose by it. So it isn't clear how that consideration is
supposed to distinguish between Margins & VA.

As for finding the best candidate or the worst candidate,
I believe that Blake is chasing a rainbow when he speaks 
of finding the best candidate.  We can try to avoid specified
strategy problems, and majority rule violations, but it's
rather overambitious to speak of finding the best candidate.

l've replies several times to the arguments regarding
to reversal of rankings. I refer Blake to the archives.

Mike