Abstract
The paper deals with a conflict situation in which a fi nite number of individuals are to reach a consensus about choosing an element from a fi xed set of feasible alternatives. If no unanimous agreement is reached, then some specifi ed disagreement alternative (not necessarily belonging to the set of feasible alternatives) will be the result.
Consequently, each participant can veto any alternative that is diff erent from the disagreement one. There are two main streams of research: one develops axiomatizations that de fine solutions, while the second constructs a non-cooperative game or a sequence of such games whose solutions are related to solutions provided by axiomatization.
We show that the three-player situation has several distinctive features by which it essentially diff ers from n-player situations with n /= 3.