system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: A good voting system should NOT fulfill the Condorcet criterion.

My problem with voting systems that fulfill the Condorcet criterion is that it allows people to vote such that A > B, B > C, C > A. There is no instance in life where a sound mind would have such a preference. I think the only way to have a preference order like this would be to accept a contradiction and to have not fully thought out the situation. I do not think this should be an option when voting and so do not agree with voting systems that allow this such as ranked pair voting. Change my view.
gpt
I think you're confused about how the Condorcet criterion works.  There's nothing about the Condorcet criterion that requires that people can express circular voting patterns.  Indeed, many of the standard proposals that satisfy the Condorcet criterion don't allow such votes.  For example, in the Kemeny–Young method, votes give a simple ranking of candidates (with ties allowed, but not cycles).

Furthermore, even the systems which appear to allow such votes could simply be modified to prevent it: for example, you can just modify the ranked pair voting method to require voters to give an ordered list of candidates and (assuming that no one has cyclic preferences) it's still a Condorcet criterion.