[EM] 03/29/02 - Rob Richie Letter and Non-Monotonicity:

[Donald Davison]

03/29/02 -  Rob Richie Letter and Non-Monotonicity:

  ------------- Forwarded Letter ------------
At 2002\03\23 07:52 -0500 Saturday, Rob Richie wrote:
 >Craig,
 >
 >I would think you would know that you can generate
 >whacky results with any system. Your example below
 >of course is political nonsense (why would every B
 >voter rank C second, but no C voters rank B second),
 >just as some of the examples that can be used to
 >mock every system you would propose.
 >
 >No, you and I know from past experience that dialogue
 >between us isn't worth the time.
 >
 >- Rob
 >

Rob Richie is the executive director of the Center for Voting and Democracy.
Craig Carey is an Anti-IRV and Anti-STV person.

I have always felt that Rob worked hard to promote true election reform in
the real world, but I did not realize that he has a very good awareness of
bogus election reforms.

Anti-IRV and Anti-STV people need bogus examples to support their bogus
claims that true reform methods are somehow defective.  Rob shows that he
is aware of this when he included in his letter the following: "(why would
every B voter rank C second, but no C voters rank B second)"

Yes, why indeed would the voters do that?  The answer is that the voters
would never do that.  That would never happen in a real election in the
real world.  Only in the pretend world of the Anti-IRV and Anti-STV people
does this stupidity exist.

Years ago on the Election Methods list I complained that the examples being
used were unrealistic and would never occur in a real election in the real
world.  The members of the EM list never paid any attention to my
complaints, they continue to this day to use bogus examples in vain
attempts to prove bogus claims.  Without bogus examples they would have
nothing to discuss.  The name `Election Methods' is a misnomer.  The list
is really a backwater collection of disappointed Anti-IRV people.

On their EM website there is a section called `Monotonicity Criterion'.
Monotonicity is dear to the hearts of the Anti-IRV people as the following
text shows:

   "Monotonicity is perhaps the most basic criterion for election methods.
Common sense tells us that good election methods should be monotonic.
Methods that fail to comply are erratic.
   A simple example will prove that IRV is non-monotonic. Consider, for
example, the following vote count with three candidates {A,B,C}:
           8: A,C       5: B,A      4: C,B            [end of quoted text]

Monotonicity was creatd so that non-monotonicity could be held up as a
bogeyman that is hiding under IRVing's bed.  The bogus message is that you
are not to get into bed with IRVing nor STV for fear that the bogeyman will
get you.

Non-monotonicity is a `Paper Tiger'.  It needs a bogus example in a vain
attempt to prove that IRVing is supposed to be bad for you.  In this
example, why would every A voter rank C second, but no C voters rank A
second?  Yes, why indeed.  Because this is a bogus example that would never
happen in a real election in the real world, so it follow that
non-monotonicity would never happen in a real election, and if it will
never happen then there is no possible problem.  Non-monotonicity is a
non-event, so the public is safe to forget about it and go on using IRVing
and STV with complete safety.

Non-monotonicity is a `Paper Tiger'.

Preference Voting/STV and IRVing are still the best methods for election reform.


Regards,
   Donald Davison, host of New Democracy at http://www.mich.com/~donald

   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
   |                        Q U O T A T I O N                          |
   |  "Democracy is a beautiful thing,                                 |
   |        except that part about letting just any old yokel vote."   |
   |                           - Age 10 -                              |
   +=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+
    APV   Approval Voting
    ATV   Alternative Vote  aka  IRV Instant Runoff Voting  aka  IRVing
    FPTP  First Past The Post  aka  Plurality
    NOTA  None of the Above  aka  RON Re-Open Nominations
    STV   Single Transferable Vote  aka  Preference Voting  aka  Choice Voting
          aka  Hare Clarke  aka  Hare Preferential Voting

Please be advised that sending email to me allows me to quote from it
and/or forward the entire email to others.