[EM] How to break this tie?

[Markus Schulze]

Dear Chris,

you wrote (13 Feb 2005):
> What is wrong with having a rule at the front of an
> election method that says "eliminate, (or bar from
> winning) all 'covered' candidates"? That would make
> the method meet Pareto, so would there then still
> be a problem separately resolving sub-cycles?

I am not aware of any single-winner election method
that satisfies monotonicity and that guarantees that
the winner is always chosen from the uncovered set.

Markus Schulze