[EM] MinLV(erw) Sorted Margins Elimination

[Kevin Venzke]

Hi Chris, no, I was referring to Forest's observation about A's (presumably maximum) losing votes. No specific method.

Kevin

(end)


Le dimanche 18 juin 2023 à 09:39:48 UTC−5, C.Benham <cbenham at adam.com.au> a écrit : 
On 9/06/2023 9:31 pm, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> I think that max losing votes comes across as inherently non-monotone, since if a candidate
> X has two losing votes scores of 30 and 40, but then the latter is increased to 42 votes and
> the contest becomes a win, their max losing votes will drop from 40 to 30. It's then not
> clear how to guarantee that the decrease of this score is compensated for, in its effect, by
> the gain of a pairwise win.

Kevin,

Are talking about the  MinLV(erw) Sorted Margins Elimination method, and 
"max" instead of min is a typo?
If so, in the example I assume you mean the 30 (not the 40) is increased 
enough for it to stop being a loss.

It is very very rare for the Smith set to contain more than three 
members.  The members of the Smith set at some point
will be the only candidates left after the rest have been eliminated.  
Then it should be clear that X "gaining a pairwise win"
simply makes X the CW.

Chris

On 9/06/2023 9:31 pm, Kevin Venzke wrote:
> Hi Chris/Forest,
>
> Le lundi 5 juin 2023 à 01:03:25 UTC−5, C.Benham <cbenham at adam.com.au> a écrit :
>> On 5/06/2023 9:16 am, Forest Simmons wrote:
>>> 35 A
>>> 10 A=B
>>> 30 B>C
>>> 25 C
>>>
>>> C>A  55-45,     A>B  45-40 (note 10A=B effect),   B>C 40-25.
>>>
>>> I noticed that A has more losing votes (45) than B has wining votes (40).