[EM] IRV's "majority winner". What if we let the people choose?

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

James Gilmour said:

But if you did decide this by a separate run-off election, I should not be 
surprised to find large
numbers of voters changing their preferences in that run-off election, and 
in so doing, reject the
CW.

I reply:

Why should they change their preference, James? So that IRV's winner will 
win? If you prefer C to B, and that's why you ranked C over B, you're making 
a ridiculous claim if you say that you're now going to start liking B better 
than C.

You continued:

Imagine a "real-life" scenario: Bush, Gore, Nader.  Would we really have had 
four years of
President Nader?

I reply:

Yes we would, if 52% prefer Nader to Gore Bush, and 48 prefer Bush to Nader, 
and we held a runoff between Bush and Nader, for a presidential election. 
Then yes, James, we'd have had at least 4 or 8 years of President Nader.

You continued:

This is about more than voting arithmetic and measures for identifying "the 
most
representative candidate".  It brings in systems of values which are 
expressed in different
dimensions from those used to measure representivity.

I reply:

I have no idea what you're talkling about. Perhaps your "system of values" 
happens to coincide with the definition of IRV? :-)

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Best Restaurant Giveaway Ever! Vote for your favorites for a chance to win 
$1 million! http://local.msn.com/special/giveaway.asp