Condorcet cyclic drop rule
DEMOREP1 at aol.com
DEMOREP1 at aol.com
Wed Apr 4 16:09:04 PDT 2001
p 238 (of the translation) from "On Elections" 1793
> A table of majority judgements between the candidates taken
> two by two would then be formed and the result -- the order
> of merit in which they are placed by the majority --
> extracted from it. If these judgements could not all exist
> together, then those with the smallest majority would be
> rejected.
---
D- Another interpretation --
The highest majority is fixed.
Any lower majority is fixed only if it does not conflict with a higher
majority.
Some pairings would thus be ignored (as if they did not exist).
Standard example ---
34 ABC
33 BCA
32 CAB
99
67 BC 32 Fixed
66 AB 33 Fixed ???
65 CA 34 Ignored ???
A>B>C ???
As usual, I note that mere rankings do NOT show *absolute* support.
Which of the 3 could get a YES majority when compared to No Choice (NC) (and
its cousins, NOTA (none of the above) and NOTB (none of the below)) ???
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list