Talk:Definite Majority Choice

Please let us avoid the term "majority" when there need not be any majority involved! Look at this:

1 A>>B>C
1 B>>C>A
1 C>>A>B
3 A=B=C

Here no "majority agrees" that any candidate should be eliminated! [Heitzig-j]

So ties have to be discussed

No, I didn't talk about ties but about ties but about majorities! In the above example, there are defeats but no majorities in the usual sense of more than half of the voters. [Heitzig-j]

I think I sent a suggestion in private email, but here it is again.

The initial page I put up was intended as a public elections proposal. So I wasn't thinking about ties.

In DMC, we eliminate candidates that lose pairwise matches to higher-approved candidates. Call the set of remaining candidates P.

If there is a tie, or if in a public election there is a near-tie (difference of, say, 0.01%), what about forming the superset P*, the union of all P's resulting from all possible reversed close races.

Then choose the winner by Random Ballot.