Condorcet paradox: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
m (Psephomancy moved page Voting paradox to Condorcet paradox over redirect: Less ambiguous name, like Wikipedia)
No edit summary
Line 16:
Note that there is no fair and deterministic resolution to this trivial example because each candidate is in an exactly symmetrical situation.
 
It is believed to be uncommon for Condorcet cycles to occur, thoughhappening therein isabout little agreement on how uncommon. The figures can range from ~59% of the time upwardelections, depending on the scenario and makeup of the electorate. See [[W:Condorcet paradox#Likelihood%20of%20the%20paradox|w:Condorcet_paradox#Likelihood_of_the_paradox]]
 
Condorcet cycles can arise either from honest votes, or from strategic votes. Some cycle resolution methods were invented primarily to elect the "best" candidate in the cycle when the cycle is created by honest voters, whereas others were invented on the assumption that most cycles would be artificially induced so that a faction could change the winner to someone they preferred over the original winner by strategically exploiting the cycle resolution method, and therefore attempt to make such strategic attempts fail or backfire, though this can sometimes mean that these cycle resolution methods elect "worse" candidates if the cycle was induced by honest votes.