[EM] Ossipoff's lost 8 proofs now supplied by Adam Tarr Re: [EM] Clarifying the definitions

[Markus Schulze]

Dear Craig,

you wrote (1 Feb 2004):
> About 15 hours ago I asked Mr Schulze for a definition of his
> Schulze method (published in October 2003) and even now I do
> not have a statement of what the Floyd algorithm is actually
> inserted into.

The Schulze method is defined in Section 2 of my paper.
Well-definedness is proven in Section 3 of my paper:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/election-methods-list/files/nmciswem.pdf

The Floyd algorithm is neither a part of the definition
of the Schulze method nor of the proof that this method
is well defined.

******

You wrote (1 Feb 2004):
> Code filling the "d" matrix is perfectly missing from the
> Schulze submission to Voting Matters.

In Section 1 of my paper, I write: "It is presumed that each
voter casts at least a partial ranking of all candidates."
In Section 2, I write: "Suppose that d[A,B] is the number of
voters who strictly prefer candidate A to candidate B."

Markus Schulze