[EM] Condorcet Criterion for plurality.

[Bart Ingles]

David Catchpole wrote:
> 
> Elucidate?
> 
> On Mon, 11 Dec 2000, Bart Ingles wrote:
> 
> >
> > David Catchpole wrote:
> > >
> > > Votes:
> > >
> > > A>B>C
> > > A>B>C
> > > A>B>C
> > > B>A>C
> > > B>A>C
> > > C>A>B
> > > C>A>B
> > > C>A>B
> > > C>A>B
> > >
> > > Using plurality, C wins. If we assume that voters have rankings, _whether
> > > or not they can express them on their ballots_, then plurality fails a
> > > Condorcet criterion.
> >
> >
> > You are also making an unstated assumption that voters have no knowledge
> > of the other voters' preferences, or at least of the candidates'
> > relative positions in the political spectrum.


I think I will withdraw this statement, at least as it applies to your
message, since failing the Condorcet criterion is not necessarily the
same as failing to elect a Condorcet winner.

My point was that the above example is insufficient to say whether or
not the Condorcet winner would be elected.