[EM] Re: margins axiom

[Steve Eppley]

Hi again,

In my (hastily written) reply to Chris Benham's question 
about my "margins vs. majorities" compromise proposal, 
I should have added that I see nothing wrong with his 
suggestion of counting zero points for each last-ranked 
candidate (regardless of whether they are last due to 
having been explicitly ranked last, or implicitly last 
by omission) in pairings of last-ranked candidates.  

Also, that has some advantages over my proposal: 
1. It's probably simpler for the voters.
2. It favors majorities, rather than margins, 
   in more pairings. (Which I count as an advantage 
   since I favor majorities.)
3. It doesn't place any additional constraints on
   the voter's user interface, since it wouldn't
   be necessary to give each voter a way to omit 
   candidates from her ordering.  

>>   If the voter leaves two candidates unranked, 
>>   don't count that as a half vote for each, count it 
>>   as zero for each.  But if the voter explicitly ranks 
>>   two candidates as equal, count that as a half vote 
>>   for each.  
> -snip- 
> CB: In reference to the phrase "if the voter explicitly 
> ranks two candidates equal", does that include "equal
> last"?

--Steve