[EM] No, that isn´t SFC either. Endless guessing games?

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Russ said:

(as a definition of SFC)

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.

I reply:

You didn´t stipulate that A is in the sincere Smith set and B isn´t, or that 
no one falsifies a preference, or that A is the CW.  And there´s nothing in 
SFC about the completion of partial individual rankings.

As I said, we could play that guessing-game from now on, but it would make 
more sense to let me define my criteria.

We now have Markus-Non-SFC, Markus-Non-GSFC, and Russ-Non-SFC  There´s 
nothing wrong with defining new criteria, of course. But, when you do, 
they´re yours, not mine.

Here´s the actual definition of SFC:

SFC:

If no one falsifies a preference, and if a majority prefer the CW to 
candidate Y, and vote sincerely, then Y shouldn´t win.

[end of SFC definition]

Which part of that don´t you undestand?

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/