Talk:IRV Prime: Difference between revisions

Was looking a little deeper at the theorem:

there must be a profile P arbitrarily close to this (in the proportions of ballots of each type) that does not yield a tie

The problem is, such a profile P may make it impossible for c to become the Condorcet winner; looking at all the profiles P where a wins (we must increment by 2 otherwise we continue to have a tie):

P1:

{{ballots|

abc: 5

acb: 2

bca: 3

bac: 2

cab: 3

cba: 2}}

P2:

{{ballots|

abc: 3

acb: 4

bca: 3

bac: 2

cab: 3

cba: 2}}

P3:

{{ballots|

abc: 4

acb: 3

bca: 3

bac: 2

cab: 3

cba: 2}}

It becomes clear that in Profile P where a tie is broken & a wins, a wins because they are the Condorcet winner, so it cannot be true that c is the Condorcet winner.

--[[User:Marcosb|Marcosb]] ([[User talk:Marcosb|talk]]) 17:20, 4 August 2021 (UTC)