[EM] Reply to Craig

[LAYTON Craig]

Yep, I'd like to print a retraction.  I miss-remembered what Mike had said.
He didn't actually claim that defeat-support does better than margins.

I'm also willing to change the phrase "much better" to "measurably and
consistently better".

So, there you go.  Even the ill informed make mistakes.

-----Original Message-----
From: MIKE OSSIPOFF [mailto:nkklrp at hotmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, 19 April 2001 15:35
To: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
Subject: [EM] Reply to Craig

Craig said:

(particularly noting that margins does
much better than defeat support, despite Mike's prior claims to the
contrary.)

I reply:

Wrong on 2 counts. Margins doesn't do "much better" than defeat-support.
It does insignificantly, microscopically better.

And I don't claim that margins doesn't do better than defeat-support
when there's zero-info and no truncation.

I did point out that BeatpathWinner does better than Ranked Pairs
in Rob's simulation of SU.

But yes I do claim that wv is better than margins, in spite of
the miniscule difference in SU when there's zero-info & no truncation.
Margins' strategy problems are so much worse that they'd outweigh
margins' tiny SU advantage even if it existed all the time.

Mike Ossipoff