[EM] Later-no-harm & condorcet incompatible

[Warren Smith]

proof:
1:A>B>C
1:B>C>A
1:C>A>B
symmetric cycle and 3-way tie (assuming anonymity & neutrality)
so 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 victory probabilities.
Now if the C>A>B voter changes to C>B>A, this makes B the condorcet winner
(100% victory probability if condorcet mathod)
so the "later" choice of B>A rather than A>B "harmed" C.
QED


wds