Display title | Condorcet PR |
Default sort key | Condorcet PR |
Page length (in bytes) | 10,239 |
Namespace ID | 0 |
Page ID | 1774 |
Page content language | en - English |
Page content model | wikitext |
Indexing by robots | Allowed |
Number of redirects to this page | 0 |
Counted as a content page | Yes |
Number of subpages of this page | 0 (0 redirects; 0 non-redirects) |
Edit | Allow all users (infinite) |
Move | Allow all users (infinite) |
Delete | Allow all users (infinite) |
Page creator | BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk | contribs) |
Date of page creation | 18:34, 21 February 2020 |
Latest editor | BetterVotingAdvocacy (talk | contribs) |
Date of latest edit | 08:19, 23 April 2020 |
Total number of edits | 15 |
Recent number of edits (within past 180 days) | 0 |
Recent number of distinct authors | 0 |
Description | Content |
Article description: (description ) This attribute controls the content of the description and og:description elements. | Condorcet PR is a term that currently encompasses (at most) all voting methods that reduce to a Condorcet method in the single-winner case. There is no general agreement on how to further specify the category, though most would likely agree that some multi-winner voting methods are not proportional in any meaningful sense (such as Bloc Ranked Pairs), and thus do not qualify to be Condorcet PR methods.[1] Further, many would likely argue that PSC, probably Droop-PSC, is a must. Generally, most discussions of "Condorcet PR" methods are about CPO-STV and Schulze STV. |