[EM] IRV Failures

[James Green-Armytage]

Eric Gorr wrote:
>In a recent conversation with an IRV supporter I asked the question:
>  What cases would you accept as failure of IRV?
>They answered:
>  Where the general public (or a significant fraction of it) failed to
>  accept the results as legitimate, or at least beyond question.  The
>  2000 and 2004 Presidential elections are examples of failed elections.
>  San Franciso's election was heralded as a success.
>They also believe that IRV has never failed to produce a fully 
>satisfactory result. Can anyone provide evidence to the contrary?

	This person's argument seems to address the integrity of the counting
method, rather than the virtue of the tally algorithm. If he or she is
only worried about the count integrity (or the public perception thereof),
then he or she has little or no basis for a preference between different
tally methods (IRV, plurality, Condorcet, whatever).
	In addition to asking whether citizens believe that votes are counted
accurately, I think that we should be asking about the level of public
satisfaction with those who are elected. If votes are counted more or less
accurately (such that the margin of error is clearly less than the margin
of victory), but a majority of the public believes that the government is
corrupt, the voting system has obviously failed.

James