RE: [EM] unsatisfied with implications of Condorcet method (fwd

[Alex Small]

This may be a very naive question, but here goes:

Mike says that in the wv method the strength of victory is measured by the
number of people who prefer a to b, whereas margins methods use the margin
of victory.

I know that margins vs. wv was argued at length some time ago, but the
discussion very quickly got beyond me.  So, here's my question:

Say that there are N voters.  N(a>b) + N(b>a) = N

N(a>b) - N(b>a) = N(a>b) - (N - N(a>b)) = 2*N(a>b) - N

Whether we use N(a>b) to measure the magnitude of a's victory (or b's
defeat) or N(a>b)-N(b>a) seems irrelevant to me, since the two numbers are
connected by a simple linear transformation.

I can see how a method that looks at victories may have different strategic
considerations than a method that looks at defeats, but I don't see the
difference between margins and wv from my simple understanding of the
definitions.

Could somebody just give a simple description of each method?

One thing I can see is how methods emphasizing strength of victory might
have different strategic considerations than methods relying on strenght of
defeat.  e.g. say A>B>C>A (simple cyclic ambiguity).  If A wins a huge
victory over B but suffers a huge defeat at the hands of C, whereas the B
vs. C contest is close, I can see how the choice of method matters
crucially.

Alex

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em