[EM] Citation for immunity to strategic voting?

[Andrew Myers]

On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 05:55:01PM -0400, Stephane Rouillon wrote:
> Actually as many people will tell you,
> this claim is wrong.
> 
> I see that Rob already gave you a counter example.
> 
> Maybe you would like to know that using winning vote as
> criteria to make pairwise comparison instead of margins
> can make your claim true for strong Condorcet winners
> (ones which have a more than 50% majority against every
> other candidate).  Using margin as a criteria your claim is only valid
> for stronger Condorcet winners (having a 2/3 majority against
> every other candidate).
> 
> Finally, no method is know to garantee the election of a weak
> Condorcet winner against unsincere preferences. This
> is understandable because absentees can always alter the balance
> against the Condorcet winner and hope to unsincerely create
> a cycle containing one of their better choice.
> 
> Hope it helps,
> Steph.

These claims are strong enough, but what I really need
is a citation to a piece of published work that shows
that at least the winning-vote version of immunity is
true. Can anyone provide a pointer? Thanks,

-- Andrew