[EM] Top Three Condorcet

[Dave Ketchum]

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 23:49:17 +0100 James Gilmour wrote:

>>>Dave Ketchum wrote:
>>>
>>>> To anyone else reading, my claim is:
>>>>       With the Condorcet method(s), the voter ranks all  candidates 
>>>>liked better than "last" (optionally including ranking "last").
>>>>
> 
> I asked:
> 
>>>Is it necessary for a voter to rank ALL candidates?
>>>
> 
> Eric replied:
> 
>>No.
>>

Which is what I said - please read carefully.

I said "ranks all candidates liked better than "last"" - MEANING "last" 
AND those NOT liked better can get default ranking without voter effort.

Ducking the next barb:  A voter could like a candidate better than "last", 
but not do ranking because the liking is too trivial to be worth the effort.

> 
> I asked: 
> 
>>>Does it cease to be "a Condorcet method" if
>>>voters have the option to truncate at their respective points of indifference?
>>>
> 
> Eric replied:
> 
>>No.
>>

Agreed.

> 
> Does Dave Ketchum agree?  He made the claim.

All of this because I objected to Forest using "Condorcet" in a 
method name when the method involved ratings (he uses the word 
"grade" which seems to me to be a synonym for rating).
> 
> James Gilmour
> PS I should appreciate receiving only one copy of EM e-mails, via the EM list.
> 
Seems like your request is properly directed to whoever set up the 

listserve.  Yahoo! does not (at least not always) default to the 

addressing you object to.

-- 
  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.