[EM] ironclad pro-Condorcet argument?
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
> 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.
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