RE: [EM] Condorcet Criterion for plurality.

[LAYTON Craig]

Mike wrote (in part):

>Or does he have a general rule
>for getting from the voted ratings (or rankings?) the information that
>the voting system needs, and would, in real life, get from its own
>ballots? If so what is that general rule?

Okay.  Maybe I'm understanding it differently to Markus.  I haven't read the
literature he refers to, but I would think it was fairly straightforward.  A
voter has a set of preferences (A>B>C) either sincere or insincere, it
doesn't matter as long as those are the preferences a voter intends to vote
(not strategic).  You posit that the preferences exist, even when they
cannot be fully expressed (say, in Approval or Plurality).  The preferences
of plurality voters would show that there can be a Condorcet winner who may
not get elected under plurality.