[EM] The SciAm article isn't as bad as I'd feared it was

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

I was afraid that they'd say that Copeland is the best. But what they say is 
that pairwise-count is the best. The article uses a good name for 
pairwise-count: Majority rule. That's a good name, because pairwise-count 
methods are the ones with the potential to best protect majority rule.

But whether or not a pairwise count method is any good at all depends on how 
circular ties are solved. Most are no good. wv is the only good 
pairwise-count method.

They only devote one 84 word paragraph to Copeland. Half of the paragraph 
introduces the possibility of circular ties. The other half describes 
Copeland, saying only that it's perhaps the simplest.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Stay informed on Election 2004 and the race to Super Tuesday. 
http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx