[EM] Reply to Craig (Aug 1, '01)

LAYTON Craig Craig.LAYTON at add.nsw.gov.au
Wed Aug 1 19:29:40 PDT 2001

Mike wrote (in part):

>In other words, Craig, we can remove the pairwise defeat from the
>pairwise defeats table without killing anyone, and without claiming
>that it's no longer true that more people ranked X over Y than
>vice-versa. All I said in my previous message was that we drop a
>pairwise defeat by removing it from the pairwise defeats table. Which
>part of that don't you understand?

I really don't want to get embroiled in this, but yes, you are correct, *as
long as you do not understand the output of an election method to be a
complete opinion* (containing n-1 x n / 2 or whatever it is pairwise
comparisons), in which case you must have a result for every pairwise


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list