[EM] Definition of _fully_ voting one candidate over another

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

All of the defensive strategy criteria directly or indirectly refer to 
voting one candidate over another. I've posted definitions of that.

I'm not changing those definitions, and I'm not changing those criteria's 
reference to that term.

But I'd like to define _fully_ voting one candidate over another. The 
underscore isn't part of the term, of course, but I underscore "fully" here, 
to emphasizse that that word is what's different.

A voter fullly votes X over Y if s/he votes in such a way that if there were 
an even number of voters, and half of them voted in that way, it would be 
impossible for Y to be the unique winner, no matter how the other half vote.

[end of definition of fully voting X over Y]

As I said, I'm satisfied with the defensive strategy criteria as they are, 
defined in terms of merely voting one candidate over another. But I felt 
that I should also define fully voting one candidate over another, partly 
because additional, alternative versions of the defensive strategy criteria 
could refer to fullly voting one candidate over another, instead of merely 
voting one candidate over another.

I don't know for which criteria such an additional version would be 
meaningful and useful. But, though I don't expect to use those additional 
"fully" versions, here's how I'd designate them: With a lower-case "f" after 
the name of the defensive strategy criterion.

Though I don't expect to use those "f" versions of the majority defensive 
criteria, I mention that SDSCf closes a loophole through which some point 
systems meet SDSC.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar – get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/