<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;"><br>
and we've all been groping for a name for this primary voting criteria that is not this non-American, Frenchie, probably sorta pinko-socialist secular humanist "intellectual" (did i mention *not* American?) whose heresy is leading us away from the One True Faith of the Single Affirmative Vote. we have sects in the One True Faith, some of us believe in the sanctity of the Two Party System: "if yer ain't fer us, you agin' us. and pass da ammunition, Ma."<br>
<br>
i don't have a better idea than "true majority rule". but there must be a better one than that. Warren, i remember you like "beats-all winner" for the CW. i wonder if the "beats-all method" is a good label.<div class="im">
<br></div></blockquote><div>At one point I ran a poll to try to decide on good names for Condorcet voting (as well as for Range/Score and for MCA/ER-Bucklin/median-based systems). You can see the results <a href="http://betterpolls.com/v/1189">here</a>. Ironically, there was a Condorcet cycle on what to call Condorcet; the smith set was [Instant?] Round Robin Voting; Pairwise Champion Voting; and Beats-All Voting.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Since then, I've tried to use the term "pairwise champion" for the CW, except occasionally when I'm writing about mathematical issues to a highly-savvy audience. In my opinion, that terminology works well. I do not, therefore, think that PCV is necessarily the best "brand" for Condorcet systems; I think that probably IRRV is good for that (despite the fact that it suggests Copeland as the tiebreaker, whereas I support C//A as the best simply-explainable tiebreaker). The similarity with IRV is a good thing, to my mind, though I understand that some may disagree.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Note that if you google "True Majority Voting", you'll find that there was a recent (but now-defunct??) attempt by IRV advocates to appropriate this term. I think that "true majority" is less explanatory than IRRV, PCV, or BAV.</div>
<div><br></div><div>JQ</div></div>