<div>Dear all, dear Markus Schulze,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>after having presented Condorcet elections to some people in the Czech green party, the following question came up.</div>
<div>Condorcet elections might work with three candidates, but what about if there are twenty of them, will the system work and elect the best candidate?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Q1: What would you answer for Condorcet elections in general and Schulze-method elections in particular?</div>
<div>Q2: Specifically, would you recommend a two-round construct, i.e. the three best candidates (or x best?) meet in the second round. </div>
<div>Q3: Would such a two-round system help to deal with the case of the "dark horse" winning with long beat-paths and people being dissatisfied with the election?</div>
<div>Q4: If yes, how many candidates should be in the second round and how should they be selected (Schulze ranking?)?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>One such mis-election with dissatisfied voters would be enough to discredit Condorcet elections in our party and two-round elections might give an additional sense of security for some voters in the face of a novel and fairly complex election system. In the Czech republic we currently use two-round elections.</div>
<div>However, if two round Condorcet elections bring no additional value, then there is no need to complicate an elegant election system.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks for your advice.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best regards</div>
<div>Peter Zborník</div>
<div> </div>