The circularity problem (FWD)

[Markus Schulze]

> X-Originating-Ip: [208.255.75.3]
> From: MIKE OSSIPOFF <nkklrp at hotmail.com>
> To: schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de, election-methods-list at eskimo.com
> Subject: Re: The circularity problem
> Date: Sat, 27 Feb 1999 22:27:05 PST
>
>
> I just want to emphasize that the example is a natural circular
> tie. With a natural circular tie, there's no really right
> outcome, and no lesser-of-2-evils problem to avoid, because
> there's no definite lesser-evil compromise.
>
> And even with a natural circular tie, the better methods, 
> including JITW & Condorcet(EM) & Schulze's method, and
> probably several new ones, make it possible for a majority
> to prevail without drastic strategy.
>
> But really the most important situations are those with a CW,
> where there's a lesser-of-2-evils problem to get rid of.
> These situations, the ones that really matter, are the ones
> where the best methods most stand out.
>
> Mike
>
>
> >From schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de Fri Feb 26 05:32:02 1999
> >Received: from sol.physik.TU-Berlin.DE (sol.physik.TU-Berlin.DE 
> [130.149.161.180])
> >	by emmi.physik.TU-Berlin.DE (8.9.2/8.9.2) with SMTP id OAA14078;
> >	Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:31:29 +0100 (CET)
> >	(envelope-from schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de)
> >Received: from laser2.physik.TU-Berlin.DE by sol.physik.TU-Berlin.DE; 
> (5.65v3.2/1.1.8.2/19Sep97-0140PM)
> >	id AA08081; Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:31:21 +0100
> >Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19990226143040.009db300 at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de>
> >X-Sender: schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de
> >X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 3.0.1 (32)
> >Date: Fri, 26 Feb 1999 14:30:40 +0100
> >To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
> >From: Markus Schulze <schulze at sol.physik.tu-berlin.de>
> >Subject: Re: The "problem" with circularity (was Re: Reply to Blake
> >  Cretney)
> >Cc: nkklrp at hotmail.com
> >Mime-Version: 1.0
> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> >
> >Dear Steve,
> >
> >you wrote (24 Feb 1999):
> >> JITW guarantees that no candidate can be
> >> made into a spoiler against his/her will.
> >
> >The Condorcet Paradox says that there are situations in
> >which _independently on who is elected_ there is always
> >a spoiler. These are the so-called "cyclic" situations.
> >
> >JITW cannot get rid of this problem.
> >
> >Example:
> >
> >   40 voters prefer A > B > C.
> >   35 voters prefer B > C > A.
> >   25 voters prefer C > A > B.
> >   Candidate A prefers candidate B to candidate C.
> >   Candidate B prefers candidate C to candidate A.
> >   Candidate C prefers candidate A to candidate B.
> >
> >Independently on who is elected, there is always
> >a spoiler. JITW cannot guarantee that no candidate
> >can be made into a spoiler against his will.
> >
> >Markus Schulze
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com