On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 03:50:59PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Fri, May 23, 2003 at 08:46:13PM +0200, Jochen Voss wrote:
> > In my example local quorum causes the following problem:
> > dropping an irrelevant option changes which
> > relevant option wins the election.
> > Global quorum does not have this problem.
>
> The way you've apparently defined your terms: Yes, Global quorum does
> have this "problem".
I think you confused something here. What do you mean with "Yes"?
> [However, it's true that your example doesn't show
> this flaw with what you call "global quorum".]
> The reason is that condorcet has this "problem",
> even with no quorums whatsoever. Martin Schulze's post
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2003/debian-vote-200305/msg00119.html
> illustrates this principal.
Huh? Plain condorcet voting does not drop options.
Jochen
--
Omm
(0)-(0)
http://www.mathematik.uni-kl.de/~wwwstoch/voss/index.html
Attachment:
pgpybs8N616zM.pgp
Description: PGP signature