[EM] FW: Recent History Perspective on Condorcet Methods

[Adam Tarr]

On 8/30/05, Ken Kuhlman <kskuhlman at gmail.com> wrote:

Do you know where I can find examples of these performance
> differences? Specifically re: beatpath vs ranked pairs. I haven't
> been able to find anything on the wiki.


Steve Eppeley has a version of Ranked Pairs called "maximize affirmed 
majorities", and he compares it to Schulze's method in detail here:

http://alumnus.caltech.edu/~seppley/Comparison%20of%20MAM%20and%20PathWinner.htm

Why has Woodall's "symmetric completion" not garnered more attention
> as a method for handling truncated ballots? Is there an argument
> against it? I've been trying to study the idea that ballots can be
> used to determine the relatedness of the candidates, and symmetric
> completion is such an obvious idea from that perspective that I have a
> hard time understanding the value of the "margins/winning votes"
> debate.


"symmetric completion" = margins, in all ways. They are precisely 
equivalent. It has all the pretty mathematical properties, and associated 
drastic strategic burying needs, that margins does. Winning votes is a 
separate animal, and allows for less drastic strategy.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20050831/1fad2c50/attachment-0003.htm>