Talk:Condorcet winner criterion: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
I don't know of a citation, but it's listed here, too: [[Condorcet_method#Related_terms]] — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 00:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC) |
I don't know of a citation, but it's listed here, too: [[Condorcet_method#Related_terms]] — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 00:21, 6 January 2020 (UTC) |
||
[[User:Kristomun]], your edit |
|||
: A method passes the M-seat Condorcet criterion [...] When M=1, the generalization reduces to the ordinary Condorcet criterion as long as the method passes the majority criterion. |
|||
has a bit of an issue, since the majority criterion seems to speak of absolute majorities, not majorities of voters with any preference between the candidates. Thus, if 35% of voters prefer A>B, 25% prefer B>A, and 40% have no preference, with A and B being the only candidates, A is a plurality's 1st choice, and the 1st choice of a majority of voters with any preference between A and B, but not an absolute majority. Should we make an edit addressing this? [[User:BetterVotingAdvocacy|BetterVotingAdvocacy]] ([[User talk:BetterVotingAdvocacy|talk]]) 03:08, 19 March 2020 (UTC) |
|||