Condorcet winner criterion: Difference between revisions
→Abstract Condorcet Criterion
Line 177:
== Abstract Condorcet Criterion ==
See [[Self-referential Smith-efficient Condorcet method]].
The Condorcet criterion can be abstractly modified to be "if the voting method would consider a candidate to be better than all other candidates when compared one-on-one, then it must consider that candidate better than all other candidates." Approval Voting and Score Voting, as well as traditional Condorcet methods pass this abstract version of the criterion, while IRV and STAR Voting don't (since they reduce to Plurality in the 2-candidate case and thus would need to always elect the traditional Condorcet winner in order to pass).<ref>[https://rangevoting.org/CondDQ.html The "official" and "unofficial" definitions of "Condorcet" - Warren D. Smith, August 2005]</ref>
Line 184 ⟶ 186:
== Notes ==
One strategy common to most Condorcet methods is to prevent a candidate from being a Condorcet winner by [[burying]] them (giving them a pairwise defeat against another candidate).
The Condorcet criterion has been criticized for certain reasons. Here is one [https://www.fairvote.org/why-the-condorcet-criterion-is-less-important-than-it-seems critique] by FairVote, with some analysis:
| |||