Dear Eric,
you wrote:
> If two or more pairwise defeats have an equal strength and the> with previously kept defeats, if any. If any defeat undermargins are also equal, they are considered to be equivalent. Starting with the strongest defeat, consider each defeat in sequence with previously kept defeats, if any. If two or more defeats are equivalent, those defeats are considered togetherconsideration is apart of a cycle, it is rejected. If any defeat under consideration is not apart of a cycle, it is kept.
I suggest that sentence 4 should be replaced by:
If q equivalent defeats under consideration are parts of a cycle with previously kept defeats, the q! possible ways to consider one of these defeats after the other are considered separately.
An interesting suggestion, but I fail to see how this would make things clearer.
At no point does the algorithm need to perform a q! operation.
-- == Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 === "Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu == Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... === ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
