[EM] Eugene rejected 'IRV' option; vote-splitting in AV

Blake Cretney bcretney at postmark.net
Sun Sep 23 13:44:57 PDT 2001

On Sun, 23 Sep 2001 12:50:17 -0700
Bart Ingles <bartman at netgate.net> wrote:

> Craig Carey wrote:
> > 
> > The Gang of 9 was running an anti-IRV campaign. The anti-IRV
> > are dated 2 Sept 2001 to 3 days ago (17 Sept), and they are here:
> > 
> >      http://www.thegangof9.com/past_cartoons.phtml
> What a great web site!  Too bad it's only for Eugene, OR.
> I had trouble viewing it with Netscape 4.7, but it comes up in
> Explorer.  

We often seem to assume that a voter's chief problem with a system is
the ballot itself.  That is, the voter neatly assigns a utility to
each candidate, but has trouble translating this into a ranked ballot
(by numbering the candidates in order).  It appears more likely to me
that the problem is that many voters simply cannot organize a large
number of options in their heads.  That would leave plurality, limited
voting (one vote), and party list (including some open list variants)
as possible methods.  Of course, more difficult methods could still be
used in legislatures and private organizations.

Blake Cretney

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list