<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Marcus,<br>
<br>
<blockquote type="cite">Barry Wright writes: "[In the 3-candidate
case] Least Worst
<br>
Defeat and Schulze [are] disagreeing on only three elections
<br>
per thousand."</blockquote>
<br>
In the 3-candidate case, how can "Least Worst Defeat" (aka MinMax
?) and Schulze <b>ever</b> disagree?<br>
<br>
As I understand it, Schulze and MAM and River and Smith//MinMax
can only ever give different winners when<br>
there are more than three candidates in the Smith set.<br>
<br>
That chance of that happening in a real public election is close
enough to zero, so therefore "MAM versus Shulze" <br>
strikes me as pointless.<br>
<br>
And if it didn't I wouldn't find the argument that one's winner
pairwise beats the other's a small proportion of times more<br>
than vice versa very compelling.<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<br>
On 10/6/2016 4:43 AM, Markus Schulze wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote cite="mid:E1brqhR-0007lo-LX@mailbox.alumni.tu-berlin.de"
type="cite">Hallo,
<br>
<br>
on the other side, the simulations have also shown that
<br>
the worst pairwise defeat of the Schulze winner is usually
<br>
weaker than the worst defeat of the MAM winner.
<br>
<br>
Norman Petry writes: "Schulze and Smith//PC are in agreement
<br>
on the choice of winner over 90% of the time, regardless of
<br>
the size of the Smith set, whereas Tideman's method diverges
<br>
in its choices as the size of the Smith set increases."
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2000-November/069868.html">http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2000-November/069868.html</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.mail-archive.com/election-methods-list@eskimo.com/msg02310.html">https://www.mail-archive.com/election-methods-list@eskimo.com/msg02310.html</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/election-methods-list/conversations/topics/5948">https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/election-methods-list/conversations/topics/5948</a>
<br>
<br>
Jobst Heitzig writes: "Note that Beatpath and Plain Condorcet
<br>
are unanimous in all these examples!"
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-May/078166.html">http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2004-May/078166.html</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/election-methods-list/conversations/messages/14251">https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/election-methods-list/conversations/messages/14251</a>
<br>
<br>
Barry Wright writes: "[In the 3-candidate case] Least Worst
<br>
Defeat and Schulze [are] disagreeing on only three elections
<br>
per thousand." "We do notice that Least Worst Defeat and
<br>
Schulze continue to show a very coherent response, agreeing
<br>
in nearly ninety-nine percent of all elections through
<br>
seven candidates."
<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://services.math.duke.edu/~bray/Courses/49s-GTD/Senior%20Theses/Barry%20Wright/Barry%20Wright's%20Thesis.pdf">https://services.math.duke.edu/~bray/Courses/49s-GTD/Senior%20Theses/Barry%20Wright/Barry%20Wright's%20Thesis.pdf</a>
<br>
<br>
Markus Schulze
<br>
<br>
----
<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://electorama.com/em">http://electorama.com/em</a> for
list info
<br>
<br>
<br>
-----
<br>
No virus found in this message.
<br>
Checked by AVG - <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.avg.com">www.avg.com</a>
<br>
Version: 2016.0.7797 / Virus Database: 4664/13152 - Release Date:
10/05/16
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>