The Chess Variant Pages



Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
Jeremy Good wrote on 2006-07-17 UTC

I am both an American and quite familiar with the Condorcet technique. In fact, I have for a few years now advocated it as a more democratic method than any other voting technique that I'm familiar with, especially IRV or 'Instant Runoff Voting' which I believe to be even less democratic than the unfortunate, zero sum, winner takes all method which decides most elections in American politics. Because I have had experience as an elected officer for a third party in America (who was in fact elected by an alternate voting technique), I have had the incentive and opportunity to look into other modes of voting. In my opinion, IRV violates the 'one man, one vote' principle we in America have fought to uphold. So, it was with great pleasure that I saw the MAM Condorcet Voting method being used here on chess variants website.

So my initial criticism which began this aspect of this thread is not of the voting method for which I have the utmost respect.

However, I do persist in thinking that my concern is a good one and it has been left unaddressed. I believe that listing two versions of Great Shatranj and two versions of Grand Shatranj as well as two versions of Mir Chess will unfairly diffuse them. It would be perfectly alright with me if they had been included in the first poll and each qualified separately. But they were not, unlike Falcon Chess and Falcon Chess 100, each included and each separately qualified.

I had been wondering how this problem would be addressed. I can say that I believe that either method A or method B proposed by 'no one' are plans that would address my concerns. I am not 'no one' but I happen to know who 'no one' is. Either method seems more fair and more democratic than the one now being implemented.


Edit Form

Comment on the page Preference Poll for Third Game Courier Tournament

Quick Markdown Guide

By default, new comments may be entered as Markdown, simple markup syntax designed to be readable and not look like markup. Comments stored as Markdown will be converted to HTML by Parsedown before displaying them. This follows the Github Flavored Markdown Spec with support for Markdown Extra. For a good overview of Markdown in general, check out the Markdown Guide. Here is a quick comparison of some commonly used Markdown with the rendered result:

Top level header: <H1>

Block quote

Second paragraph in block quote

First Paragraph of response. Italics, bold, and bold italics.

Second Paragraph after blank line. Here is some HTML code mixed in with the Markdown, and here is the same <U>HTML code</U> enclosed by backticks.

Secondary Header: <H2>

  • Unordered list item
  • Second unordered list item
  • New unordered list
    • Nested list item

Third Level header <H3>

  1. An ordered list item.
  2. A second ordered list item with the same number.
  3. A third ordered list item.

Alt text for a graphic image

A definition list
A list of terms, each with one or more definitions following it.
An HTML construct using the tags <DL>, <DT> and <DD>.
A term
Its definition after a colon.
A second definition.
A third definition.
Another term following a blank line
The definition of that term.