Talk:Schulze method

Schulze method is a former featured article candidate. Please view the links under Article milestones below to see why the nomination was archived. For older candidates, please check the archive.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 4, 2009	Featured article candidate	Not promoted

Elections and Referendums Unassessed

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
???	This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Politics B‑class Mid‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

MarkusSchulze (talk · contribs) / Schulze method This user has contributed to the article. This user has declared a connection. (User devised the method that is the subject of this article, assuming compliance with WP:REALNAME.)

Archives

Archive 1

Archive 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

MinMax set and prudence criteria

Stubs for these 2 criteria would be nice too. --Wat 20

I tried to add a Column for MinMax to the table, but changing the template is not changing it on the Schulze Method page. Not sure why. Schulze Method passes MinMax criterion but Ranked Pairs (Tideman) does not, and this table should include that information to help differentiate the two. --Owen — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.201.20.135 (talk) 17:55, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to "MiniMax criterion". Is there a citation or reference to this criterion? I would like to understand better. My understanding of the MiniMax article is that the Minimax decision for a given player is the choice that will give the least worst outcome given the range of choices by the other players in a game; hence uncertainty is intrinsic to the principle, but I see a contradiction with regard to application to a preference aggregation algorithm where the voters preferences are certain. Meanwhile, my understanding with regard to preference aggregation algorithms, MiniMax is a heuristic that chooses the alternative with the least-worst pairwise defeat against other alternatives. However, I believe that Schulze returns different output than MiniMax voting methods, correct? If so, I am wondering how Schulze can satisfy "MiniMax"? Thanks for any clarification. Filingpro (talk) 18:23, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ordering Columns In Compliance Table

I suggest we list criteria first by winner selection, then strategic voting, then strategic nomination, then counting:

Majority
Majority Loser
Mutual Majority
Condorcet
Condorcet Loser
Smith
Reversal Symmetry
Participation, Consistency
Monotonicity
Later-no-harm
Later-no-help
Clone Independence
ISDA
LIIA
Polynomial Time
Resolvability

We sort by number of compliances, and secondary sort by compliances left to right. We can put Schulze at top as long as table correctly titled. Filingpro (talk) 21:05, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Complete garbage

Sorry Schulze, you're completely obtuseness to include the "Tennessee example" and stubbornly stick with this obscure spiderweb map makes this method all but incomprehensible to all but the greatest autists. Sad really, as this would be an excellent method to elect single winner executive positions over IRV. And you wonder why the two round system/IRV/STV are used the world over infinitely more than your still confusing method. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.66.22.220 (talk) 19:09, 12 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As Albert Einstein said: "Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler." Markus Schulze 09:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cool python implementation

https://github.com/bjornlevi/schulze — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.17.137.38 (talk) 19:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]