This may be a very naive question, but here goes: Mike says that in the wv method the strength of victory is measured by the number of people who prefer a to b, whereas margins methods use the margin of victory.
I know that margins vs. wv was argued at length some time ago, but the discussion very quickly got beyond me. So, here's my question: Say that there are N voters. N(a>b) + N(b>a) = N N(a>b) - N(b>a) = N(a>b) - (N - N(a>b)) = 2*N(a>b) - N Whether we use N(a>b) to measure the magnitude of a's victory (or b's defeat) or N(a>b)-N(b>a) seems irrelevant to me, since the two numbers are connected by a simple linear transformation. I can see how a method that looks at victories may have different strategic considerations than a method that looks at defeats, but I don't see the difference between margins and wv from my simple understanding of the definitions. Could somebody just give a simple description of each method? One thing I can see is how methods emphasizing strength of victory might have different strategic considerations than methods relying on strenght of defeat. e.g. say A>B>C>A (simple cyclic ambiguity). If A wins a huge victory over B but suffers a huge defeat at the hands of C, whereas the B vs. C contest is close, I can see how the choice of method matters crucially. Alex ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
