[EM] poll fever

[Stephane Rouillon]

James Green-Armytage a écrit :

> "MIKE OSSIPOFF" <nkklrp at hotmail.com> writes:
> >No need to pick a method first, because we don't need one winner. Nothing
> >wrong with getting different winners by using different methods. In fact,
> >that's better, because it tests more methods and compares their results.
>
> I agree!!! Voting on a method would be a catch-22: which method do you use
> to vote on the method?!  Anyway, that's a problem for another day.

We solved that problem by making recursive elections until we obtain a cycle.
The first single-winner method of the cycle of solution is the winner.
Example:
winners in chronological order A, C ,E ,C ,E => C is the winner.