Proof Vermont method isn't mopnotonic (Re: [EM] "More often" (was: IRV and Condorcet operating identically)

[Markus Schulze]

Dear Craig,

you wrote (1 March 2003):
> Correction: Mr Schulze was right in saying that an AV-like method
> that passes the test of monotonicity and that is defined explicitly
> for all numbers candidates, and that need not be optimal, is not known.

What is an "AV-like method"? What does "explicitly defined" mean in
this context? Could you give a concrete example of a method that is
well defined but not "explicitly defined"? What does "optimal" mean
in this context?

Markus Schulze

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