[EM] IRV vs. Plurality

[Eric Gorr]

At 7:32 PM -0400 8/3/03, James Green-Armytage wrote:
>Dear voting methods fans,
>
>	I am interested in knowing how everyone here feels about this question:
>
>	Which is better, IRV or Plurality?

By every measure I consider important, I see no difference between 
the two. They should both be absolutely avoided.

Plurality is probably not worthy of any discussion...

As for IRV, this case clearly shows a tremendous problem with the system.
(modified from prior postings)

   40 A
   35 C > B
   30 B

A simply should not win and it does under IRV 
(http://www.fairvote.org/irv/irv_orgs.htm) even though > 60% of the 
voters preferred B....who got eliminated in the very first round.

Of course, many other examples showing the absolute deficiencies of 
IRV can be presented.

>I am fairly sure that IRV, Condorcet,
>and Approval people should try to treat each other as allies rather than
>competitors, and that they should not try to strawman or exclude each
>others' systems.

While there are at least be some questions regarding Approval vs. 
certain versions of Condorcet, I don't there is any argument left in 
the support of IRV over these two obviously superior methods.

(However, I definitely prefer RP Condorcet (Deterministic #1-wv)...or 
whatever Mike O. was calling it...don't have it in front of me at the 
moment....over all other single-winner methods I am aware of.)


And I will let others on this list deal with the various other issues 
you presented...

-- 
== Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 ===
"Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both
benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu
== Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... ===