Of course wording that covers that should be included. Maybe it could be said in a way that covers all those possibilities in one wording, without separate mention of the special case where 2 or more tied-defeats indivicuallly don't cycle with old-kept-defeats, but do so if boith are kept.
Personally, I think I did cover this in #5. The case of multiple tied-defeats is covered by:
If two or more defeats are equivalent, those defeats are considered together with previously kept defeats, if any.
(#4 covered what is considered to be equivalent)
Now, in light of your comments, I think my statement:
If any defeat under consideration is apart of a cycle, it is rejected.
Could be improved by changing it to:
If any defeat under consideration, which has not yet been kept, is apart of a cycle, it is rejected.
Similarly,
If any defeat under consideration, which has not yet been kept, is not apart of a cycle, it is kept.
I will probably also turn the word 'cycle' into a link with a more detailed description.
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
