Dear Adam, you wrote (20 Feb 2002): > Finally, let me add that I don't think Ranked Pairs is the best tie-breaker > either... I think Mike's Shwartz Sequential Dropping is better. The only > differences as far as I can tell are that > 1) You only deal with the Smith Set > 2) You consider number of voters in favor of the defeat, not the margin of > the defeat.
I don't understand this paragraph. Do you want to say that the difference between RP and SSD is that the latter one meets the Smith criterion and measures the strength of a pairwise defeat by the number of voters in favor? You wrote (20 Feb 2002): > Months before I joined this list, I corresponded briefly with Mike Ossipoff > and Russ Paielli about examples I had cooked up that seemed to create problems > for Condorcet. At the time, I did not realize the distinction between Ranked > Pairs and SSD, and some of my seemigly undesireable results hinged on this. Could you post those examples where RP and not SSD produces those "seemingly undesirable results"? Markus Schulze
