Talk:Favorite betrayal criterion: Difference between revisions
is there a converse for least-favorite candidates?
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) m (Psephomancy moved page Talk:Favorite Betrayal criterion to Talk:Favorite betrayal criterion: Title case) |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (is there a converse for least-favorite candidates?) |
||
Line 5:
Why is that necessarily incompatible with FBC? Obviously, if A>B gives a probability that the winner is either A or B that is not only greater that what A=B gives but also greater than what B>A gives, that is a FBC failure. However, if both A>B and B>A give a greater probability that the winner is either A or B than what A=B gives, and A>B and B>A give the same probability as each other, then that is not necessarily a FBC failure. (As the criterion is currently stated, ranking one sincere co-favorite over another does not qualify as a favorite betrayal.) - DPJ, 2006-07-24 07:18 UTC
Is there a corresponding criterion for making it safe to give lowest support to your least-favorite candidate? — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 15:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
| |||