[EM] Need IRV examples; voting show

[James Gilmour]

Forest wrote:

> Rob here's an inconsistency example adapted from message 7642 of the EM
> archives:
>
> First Precinct:
>                 190 SHA
>                 140 HAS
>                 120 AHS
>
> Second Precinct:
>                 150 SHA
>                 170 HAS
>                 230 AHS
>
> According to IRV, candidate H wins decisively in both precincts,
> but (according to IRV) candidate A wins decisively when the results from
> both precincts are combined.
>

Maybe I'm missing something, but I don't see the inconsistency here at all.

You either have two separate elections (Precinct 1 and Precinct 2) OR you have one
election in which electors happen to vote within their local precincts.

If you have ONE election (precincts combined), the "results" within any individual
precinct are irrelevant.  Only one result matters - the result obtained by
tabulating all the votes together.

It should be no surprise to anyone that if you subsequently cut some sub-sets from
the whole set, you can get all sorts of different "results".  But none of these is
relevant to the election.

James

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em