On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 07:15:47PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 06:12:21PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote: > > ii. Unless this would eliminate all options in the Schultz set, > > the weakest defeats are eliminated. > > > > Definition: The strength of a defeat is represented by two > > numbers: the number of votes in favor of the defeat, and > > the number of votes against the defeat. A defeat with > > the fewest options in favor of that defeat is a weak option. > > Of the weak options, an defeat with the most votes opposed > > to that defeat is the weakest defeat. More than one defeat > > can be the weakest. > > > > Definition: A defeat is eliminated by treating the count of > > votes both for and against that defeat as zero in the context > > of that defeat. > > I suspect the definition of weakest defeats should explicitly include > pairwise ties (if they're weak).
I am sorry if this tries your patience, but I do not understand this statement. Can you give an example with numbers? Specifically, I don't understand what would distinguish a "weak" pairwise tie from a non-weak one. -- G. Branden Robinson | Debian GNU/Linux | If ignorance is bliss, [EMAIL PROTECTED] | is omniscience hell? http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |
msg01941/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
