[EM] Subcycle methods of 1996

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Markus said:

Here, Mike Ossipoff proposes a subcycle rule:

[...]

Here, Mike Ossipoff proposes another subcycle rule:

[...]

I reply:

I doubt that I proposed those subcycle methods. I mentioned some possible 
methods based on subcycles, and that was around ´96. It seems to me that I 
made a point of clarifying that I was not proposing those methods, and that 
I was mentioning them because it was of interest what would be the price of 
accomplishing what they were intended to accomplish.

Likewise, last summer I mentioned a method that meets the strongest majority 
defensive strategy criterion. But the price for that was that the method was 
indecisive, because offensive order-reversers could keep preventing anyone 
from winning. Then too, I clarified that I wasn´t proposing that method, but 
was merely discussing what it would take to meet the strongest majority 
defensive strategy criterion.

Having never advocated those subcycle methods, I still don´t advocate them. 
But Pareto  compliance isn´t as essential as some think. Sequential Pairwise 
violates Pareto, and Sequential Pairwise is very widely used, and isn´t bad 
in meetings.  If that method that meets the strongest majority defensive 
strategy criterion merely violated Pareto, then it might be worth 
considering.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! 
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/