I defined Condorcet-IRV1 and Condorcet-IRV2, in my post entitled "MMC, CD, and the Condorcet Criterion are compatible".
Though Condorcet-IRV1 is appealingly more briefly-defined, maybe Condorcet-IRV2 is better. If there are unbeaten candidates, then I don't know of any reason why beaten ones should remain in the rankings, for the IRV count. --------------------------------------- I said that I didn't know if Symmetrical-IC-IRV improves significantly on IC-IRV. But wouldn't it? By merely not ranking a set of candidates, you're maximally voting against them, voting for their defeat, in the Condorcet-search part of the count. --------------------------------------- Also, I previously described some small improvements that IC-IRV brings over TUC-IRV So maybe the best of these methods is Symmetrical-IC-IRV2. But TUC-IRV2, or maybe TUC-IRV1, is surely good enough, and more familiar, and more briefly defined. Michael Ossipoff
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
