[EM] ironclad pro-Condorcet argument?

Dave Ketchum davek at clarityconnect.com
Wed Aug 25 14:41:50 PDT 2004

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 11:33:21 -0700 Steve Eppley wrote:

> Dave K wrote:
>>Steve E wrote:
>>>But this Robert's procedure nevertheless satisfies the 
>>>Condorcet criterion, which requires the election of the 
>>>Condorcet winner if there is one.
>>Robert's is into repeated balloting, using the full slate 
>>of candidates, which usually (BUT NOT ALWAYS) elects the
>>CW (if I have to do a demo for nonbelievers, it ain't
>>that hard). 
> I referred to Robert's "single-elimination pairwise" 
> method, which I consider their "normal" method.  
> It can't defeat a Condorcet winner, assuming 
> sincere voting.

Please give a reference - I do not recognize what you describe in Robert's.

> --Steve

  davek at clarityconnect.com    people.clarityconnect.com/webpages3/davek
  Dave Ketchum   108 Halstead Ave, Owego, NY  13827-1708   607-687-5026
            Do to no one what you would not want done to you.
                  If you want peace, work for justice.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list