Scott--
I'd said:
But they always give the same results as eachother, so they're said to be
equivalent.
You ask:
If they're exactly equivalent, why even care about the less simple
algorithm?
I reply:
For a very good reason: The CSSD definiton, CSSD's verbal definition, the
one that I posted yesterday, has much more natural and obvious motivation
and justification than BeatpathWinner's definition.
...even though BeatpathWinner has a much simpler and briefer computer
program than CSSD or SSD or Ranked-Pairs does.
As I said, my experience is that SSD's definition is natural and compelling
for people. That's probably because the Schwartz set is more natural and
compelling than cycles or beatpaths.
After I posted yesterday, it occurred to me that I didn't speak clearly
about BeatpathWinner vs CSSD, and, even before I noticed your posting, I was
going to post again today to clarify that.
Mike Ossipoff
_________________________________________________________________
Don�t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
