<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:Arial;
color:navy;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=blue>
<div class=Section1>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Once again Markus Schulze is
trying to discredit the Condorcet-Kemeny method. (See below.)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>This is ironic because
"his" method -- which he calls the Schulze method, and which would
more meaningfully be called the Condorcet-Schulze method -- produces the same
results as the Condorcet-Kemeny method in most cases.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>What percentage of cases
produce the same overall ranking sequence? I would guess it's at least
85% to 90%, and perhaps as high as 95%, if all possible ranking combinations
are considered. If only the single-winner result is considered, the results
would match in an even higher percentage of cases.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> Markus Schulze wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> does the San Francisco
Bay Area Curling Club still<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> use the Kemeny-Young
method? If not, why did it<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> abolish the
Kemeny-Young method?<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>This club continues to use
VoteFair ranking, a subset of which is the Condorcet-Kemeny method.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Specifically they used
VoteFair ranking in their 2010 March election.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>As you imply, this is a good
endorsement for VoteFair ranking. Thanks for the reminder!<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Clarification: I recommended
that the club use VoteFair representation ranking because it provides better
proportionality than VoteFair popularity ranking. So far, based on the
results of the two elections I looked at, these two rankings have been the same
up to the number of positions that are being filled. There have been
differences at lower levels, but that has had no effect on who is
elected. Therefore, the distinction between VoteFair popularity ranking
and VoteFair representation ranking has not mattered. In either case, the
club continues to use VoteFair ranking to elect their officers.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> Its website says:
"The two nominees with the most<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> votes will hold office
for two years, the nominee<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> with the third highest
level of votes will hold<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> office for one
year."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>This wording is ambiguous to
election-method experts, but meaningful to real-world voters.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>When pairwise counting --
which we both advocate as the fairest approach -- is used, we can say that
person A had 40 votes compared to person B who had 60 votes. This meaning
is slightly different from the word "votes" in regards to plurality
voting. I presume the former meaning is intended here.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Also note that this quote
refers to the time in office, not the vote-counting algorithm.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>>
http://www.bayareacurling.com/elections2010<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> To me, this sounds like
SNTV.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>That's a big assumption to
be made from an ambiguous wording.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>> Markus Schulze<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>For those who may not know,
and especially for Peter Zbornik to whom Markus intended his message, there is
a third similar method. It's called Ranked Pairs on Wikipedia, it's
sometimes called the Tideman method, and a more meaningful name would be the
Condorcet-Tideman method.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>The Condorcet-Schulze method
and the Condorcet-Tideman method use a similar elimination approach, where one
looks for the biggest pairwise numbers and the other looks for the biggest
margins of victory.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>(Other Condorcet methods do
not have characteristics that make them worth considering in real
elections. One of them is used in games where its element of randomness
adds entertainment value.)<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>All three of the above-named
Condorcet methods produce the same results in "most" cases, which
means the difference is not noticeable in real elections.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>This is a good time to
mention that there is an organization (I don't recall the name) that calculates
the Condorcet-Schulze winner and also calculates the Condorcet-Tideman
winner. If these are not the same candidate, the Kemeny scores are
calculated for the two applicable sequences, and the sequence with the higher
Kemeny score determines which of the two candidates is declared the
winner. This is a clever way to get around the challenge of writing
software to calculate the Condorcet-Kemeny method. It also demonstrates
the similarities between the results calculated by the Condorcet-Schulze and
Condorcet-Kemeny methods. Furthermore, it demonstrates that the person
behind it is wise enough not to completely rely on the Condorcet-Schulze
method.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>For perspective: Back
around 1990, without knowing the names of voting methods and voting criteria, I
was figuring out the fairest voting method. After I considered and
dismissed the IRV approach, I considered and then dismissed the
Condorcet-Schulze approach, which is to look at the biggest or smallest
pairwise numbers. I reasoned that that approach has the same weakness as
IRV and plurality. Whereas plurality and IRV look at first-choice
preferences, the Condorcet-Schulze approach is better because it looks at
pairwise numbers. But I knew that looking for the biggest or smallest
numbers is like looking at the surface of water to figure out what's happening
beneath the surface. I reasoned that a fair method needed to look
deeper. So I used an approach that is similar to fitting a straight line
through a number of non-aligned data points, namely to add together numbers that
measure the degree of fit. The resulting sum -- which in this case is of
applicable pairwise counts -- provides a way to find the best fit by finding
the sequence with the maximum sum. It was years later that I found out
that an academically known method (the Kemeny method) similarly used the sum of
opposition (!) pairwise counts and looked for the smallest such score.
This parallel development should not seem too surprising because the general
approach is used in yet other situations in physics and mathematics.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Interestingly, the Wikipedia
definition of the Condorcet-Kemeny method now uses the kind of score I came up
with, not the one specified by Kemeny (and others). The methods are
mathematically equivalent. The Kemeny-specified approach is not as easy
to understand, which perhaps accounts for some of the method's earlier neglect.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Perhaps the main reason the
Condorcet-Kemeny method was neglected is that it's so difficult to implement in
software. By contrast, the Condorcet-Schulze method is easy to implement
in software.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Getting back to the main
subject, the members of the San Francisco Bay Area Curling Club do not need to
know how to write the software, they just care about the results. They
like the results (see the Testimonial page at VoteFair.org), so they continue
to use it.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Here it seems appropriate to
address a comment written by Jameson Quinn in another post within this thread:<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>"ps. Peter, you should
not be shocked by the enthusiastic response to your query. You've thrown a hunk
of meat into the lion cage: the chance to see our theories applied in a real,
important case. While we can give you useful feedback, we will never come to a
consensus; in the end, you'll have to pick a proposal yourself. Also, while we
lions may present an amusing spectacle, we still mostly respect one another
underneath, and we understand that there is no guarantee that any of our
proposals will be implemented in the end."<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>This nicely characterizes
what's going on.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Fortunately the conflicts
between voting-method experts are well-behaved compared to the conflicts that
erupt into warfare, genocide, terrorism, etc. Those physically aggressive
conflicts are what we are all working to eliminate through fairer voting methods.
We all want to replace fighting with casting ballots.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'>Richard Fobes<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal style='text-autospace:none'><font size=2 face="Courier New"><span
style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Courier New"'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 color=navy face=Arial><span style='font-size:
10.0pt;font-family:Arial;color:navy'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>