Hi, Markus Schulze: > the Condorcet criterion and the later-no-harm criterion > are incompatible. Therefore, the fact that Debian's Condorcet > method violates the later-no-harm criterion doesn't come > from the order of its checks. > That may be so, but our method of removing choices that fail to win over FD clearly causes the "normal" Condorcet tallying to fail later-no-harm in situations where it ordinarily would not. https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2013/05/msg00012.html offers a possible solution which IMHO should be investigated more closely. -- -- Matthias Urlichs
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature