[EM] Markus reply

[Markus Schulze]

Dear Russ,

I interpret Mike Ossipoff's "Strategy-Free Criterion" (SFC)
and "Generalized Strategy-Free Criterion" (GSFC) as follows:

"X >> Y" means that a majority of the voters strictly prefers
candidate X to candidate Y.

SFC: Suppose (1) A >> B and (2) the partial individual
rankings can be completed in such a manner that candidate A
is a Condorcet candidate. Then candidate B must be elected
with zero probability.

GSFC: Suppose (1) A >> B and (2) the partial individual
rankings can be completed in such a manner that candidate A
is in the Schwartz set and candidate B is not in the Schwartz
set. Then candidate B must be elected with zero probability.

*********

I could ask Mike Ossipoff whether my interpretation of
his criteria is correct. But I guess that I won't get an
answer. (Maybe Mike fears that he could be nailed. Maybe
he fears that the reader observes that his criteria are
only relaxations of my majority beatpath criterion of 1997.)

Markus Schulze