[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: revised implementation of the new voting machinery draft

> > Minor nit: it's (C,A) which is weakest, as (A,C) is not a proposition.

On Sun, Nov 17, 2002 at 06:31:19PM +0100, Jochen Voss wrote:
> Why not?  To quote from your Nov 17 draft:

I changed the definition of proposition between Nov 16 draft 
and Nov 17 draft.  That above minor nit was in the context of
the Nov 16 draft.

> > > 	    A    B    C
> > >        A    -   27    0
> > >        B   22    -    0
> > >        C    0    0    -
> > >     the Schwartz set is { A, C }
> > 
> > Hmm.. I forgot to eliminate options with no votes for them.
> Be careful here: in this example my program agrees with Anthony
> Towns implementation, both get a tie between A and C.  If we
> eliminate options with no votes for them (C in this case) we
> change the result: now the option A becomes the winner.

Yes: A got 27 votes prefering it over B, B got 22 votes prefering it
over A, all preferences involving C have been eliminated.

C should have been excluded from the Schwartz set, because it has
no votes.

> It may be possible, that we want that change.  But we should
> know that this is a deviantion from our former implementation.

It's a difference from the former implementation because the former
implementation was wrong.


Reply to: