[EM] An IRVing response
Richard Moore
rmoore4 at home.com
Fri Aug 3 20:15:05 PDT 2001
Douglas Greene wrote:
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2001 04:03:58 -0500
> From: Randy Kunkee Subject: Re: The Problem(s) with
> ...
> The claim that IRV votes cannot be summed is flat out
> wrong.
Technically, this critic is correct, if one accepts a weaker
definition of summability that does not include the
constraint that the information can be summed *in a compact
matrix form*.
However, there are two disadvantages to IRV's weaker form of
summability (in addition to the more complicated vote
counting procedures) that are seldom discussed (though they
have been mentioned on this list).
1. Reporting of results is complicated. Many people would
like to see the election totals published in the newspaper.
But you can't just publish the pairwise or preference
matrices and expect readers to be able to see how the
results follow from that. You have to publish the number of
ABCD votes, the number of ACBD votes, the number of ADBC
votes, etc. With more than a few candidates the list gets
quite long.
2. As Forest Simmons pointed out on this list a few months
back, it is possible for a candidate to win every precinct
in IRV and still lose the election.
We much prefer a method that meets the strong definition of
summability.
Richard
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list