[EM] Markus reply

[Russ Paielli]

Markus Schulze markus.schulze-at-alumni.tu-berlin.de |EMlist| wrote:
> Dear Russ,
> 
> I wrote (27 Feb 2005):
> 
>>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.
> 
> 
> You wrote (27 Feb 2005):
> 
>>In your interpretation of SFC above, I think your supposition 2
>>should actually be part of the result. Here is my attempt at it:
>>
>>SFC: Suppose A >> B. Then partial individual rankings can be
>>completed in such a manner that no preferences are reversed
>>and candidate B must be elected with zero probability.
> 
> 
> Well, it seems to me that your interpretation does't work when
> there is a circular tie with A >> B, B >> C, and C >> A.
> 
> Example:
> 
>    40 BCA
>    35 CAB
>    25 ABC
> 
> Markus Schulze

Before Mike has a conniption, I should probably say that I misstated his 
SFC criterion. SFC stipulates that A is the "sincere" Condorcet winner. 
The exact definition or correctness of SFC was not my point, however.

--Russ