Eric,
--- Eric Gorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Else (when B is D, or B and D tie pairwise) rank A>B ahead of C>D if A defeats C pairwise, and C>D ahead of A>B if C defeats A pairwise."
Looks interesting.
What would you do if neither A nor C defeat the other pairwise?
Maybe throw a division-by-zero.
lol.
Steve Eppley seemed to think that it would be alright in a public election to take the defeats randomly.
Hmm, couldn't you use the Schulze ranking to break these ties?
I would imagine there are any number of possibilities iinvolving a strict ranking of the candidates, including Eppley's RVH. Of course, pure random selection would work as well.
-- == 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
