Hello, On Thu, Apr 17, 2003 at 07:14:46PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > Did you miss the first sentence? Yes, I did miss the first sentence. Sorry! > > > 5. If there are defeats between options in the Schwartz set, we > > > drop the weakest such defeats, and return to step 4. > > > I asked this before: is the concept of "dropping a defeat" > > really clear without explanation? At least it is not clear to me. > > Does it mean dropping the defeated option? Or setting the values > > in two cells of the tally table to 0? > > Maybe we should define "dropped" -- if it's ambiguous, that's not good. > What kinds of ambiguity do you see? > > Personally, the only ambiguity I see is that we "drop" "defeats" in > 5. and we "drop" "options" in 2. and 3. That might invite an unwarranted > parallel in some people's minds. > > Probably, to reduce ambiguity, we should probably use the phrase > "removed from consideration" for 2. and 3. (where we're dealing with > options rather than defeats). > > If you think we need more than this, perhaps you could explain what > kind(s) of ambiguity you see? Dropping options is clear to me: I just ignore the option in question for the remaining part of the procedure. I do not include it in the Schwartz set and I do not consider it when choosing the winner of the election. But I have no clear idea how to drop "drop a defeat". I guess it's just a problem with my english, but how do I do it? Do I clear some cells in the tally table? Maybe one or two or a complete row? Jochen -- Omm (0)-(0) http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/index.html
Attachment:
pgpdJMmemvjqK.pgp
Description: PGP signature