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

Re: April 17th Draft of the Voting GR



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: pgp3AsOyL133c.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: