[EM] Ronald Tannenwald's example

[Donald E Davison]

Greetings list,

Ronald Tannenwald wrote:
>Dear Donald,
>
>    Thank you for explaining the Salva method.I don't agree with the assertion
>that one's lower alternates cannot contribute to the defeat of one's preferred
>candidate.Consider the following:
>
>    49%      3%      23%     25%
>   _____    ____     ____    ____
>
>     A        B        B       C
>              A        C       B
>
>In this scenario A is victorious. Had the 3% block voted only for their
>first choice then B would have won.
>
>    Cordially,
>
>Ronald Tannenwald
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - comments by Donald - - - - - - - - -

Dear Ronald Tannenwald,

     I stand corrected.

     But, if the 3% block will only vote their first choice in the next
election, thinking that it is a good thing to do, maybe three or four
percent of the C voters will do the same, also thinking it is a good thing
to do. Candidate B still loses.

     It seems that all of these election methods that count two or more
choices at the same time will be subject to this flaw. Maybe we should not
use any of these methods.

Regards,
Donald