[EM] Helping a candidate in the case of ties

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

Dave Ketchum wrote:
> This is more detailed work, depending on precise knowledge.
> 
> Also gets tricky since many changes affect more than one pair of 
> candidates.
> 
> For a simple example where helping A in A vs B, without disturbing their 
> relationship to other candidates, will help C (could be hoping to cause 
> A to be bigger than B in their pair; could be simply to change the 
> magnitude of their difference).
>      Tell those who would do A=B or B>A, to vote A>B.  This will affect 
> A vs B without affecting any other pair of candidates.
> 
> Note that adding one or both of these, or giving them adjacent ranks 
> when they had not had this, requires more complex analysis.

This was intended to be in the context of, for instance, later-no-help 
or mono-raise. These relative criteria are defined as "x should not be 
helped/harmed when...". Therefore I don't have the privilege of telling 
voters to, for instance, vote A>B instead of A=B - the simulator just, 
(in the case of mono-raise) raises a random candidate and checks if that 
harms him, or lowers a random candidate and checks if that helps him.

The hard part is to define "help" and "harm" when either or both of the 
outcomes have ties in the social ordering.