Mike O wrote: -snip- >Of course any method that doesn't meet them already would be >improved if mitigated by requiring compliance with Condorcet's >criterion & GMC, or NPL & NML. Is there a general way to require compliance? I think that means stating the criteria as methods which select a subset of the candidates. A method (like Coombs) could be the tie-breaker of the criterion-expressed-as-method (like NML): NML//Coombs BeatsAll and NPL are methods which express the Condorcet Criterion. Is NML a method which expresses GMC? If not, what method does? -snip- >I've defined LO2E-2 in full here, but a brief way of putting >it could be: A method meets LO2E-2 iff a full majority who >rank A over B have a way of voting whereby they can ensure >that B won't win, and this doesn't require that they vote >a less-liked alternative equal to or over a more liked one. > >That isn't my full & complete definition, which I've previously >posted on EM. -snip- For those unfamiliar with the term "iff" Mike used above, it's a shorthand which means "if and only if." ---Steve (Steve Eppley [EMAIL PROTECTED])
