Check out Symmetric Chess, our featured variant for March, 2024.

Enter Your Reply

The Comment You're Replying To
no one wrote on Wed, Jul 19, 2006 01:52 AM UTC:Good ★★★★
You have answered my questions well and in the process given what I
believe
is a good explanation of the basics of the Condorcet method. For this I
thank you. Your explanations and my followups have given me good reason
to
believe that the method is all you say it is. Its flaws you have not
hidden
or minimized; I see them as two. One is the random nature of a tiebreak,
although that is a lesser flaw than many other methods. The other is that
it  gives the least objectionable results which is something different
than most elections, and I can live with this too. So I leave you with
one
comment. 

The method you use is certainly appropriate for its purpose and has many
nice features. I think those who followed this thread will generally
agree
that it is a worthy method and will be happy to see it used in the
future.
Many might wish you had stuck with the original configuration of the
method for this tournament's second round of voting. This is the one
area
where I still have substantial disagreement with your decisions.

My purpose was not to harrass or exasperate you, but to gain what I could
for all involved and to register disapproval of those things I believed
were wrong without creating any personal animosity. By maintaining
anonymity I hope I have achieved the latter. I oppose the creation of
factions and do not like what I have seen of flame wars regardless of
provocation. I hope I have been reasonably cordial generally; enough so
that you did not feel that attacks were directed at you personally rather
than some of your actions and decisions. For those times I have gone
across the line, I apologize. 

While I still disagree with some of your decisions I believe it is time
to
leave and allow the individuals involved or possibly the voting body to
continue this argument if they so desire. You have been an honorable if
unpredictable and somewhat inconsistant and arbitrary opponent but that
is
often the nature of genius. I am certainly not all I wish to be, not that
I
claim to be anything special. Your involvement in the creation and
maintenance of this site is something special. I look forward to meeting
you over a chessboard in the future. Goodbye.

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.
Here is some preformatted text.
  This line begins with some indentation.
    This begins with even more indentation.
And this line has no indentation.

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.