[Election-Methods] voting research

[Warren Smith]

The whole thing about optimal strategy in IRV
being NP-complete, is a crock of shit.

1. USUALLY it is EASY to find a BETTER-than-honesty
strategy in IRV.  This is not just me ranting.
It is in fact a published theorem.

2. The NPC proof does not matter since it is about
not the usual case, but the hardest-to-strategize case.
And it is not about finding a good strategy, it is about
finding the best strategy.
This theorem is utterly irrelevant to reality
and discussing it in the manner you (K.M.) just did
is an abomination.

3. The NPC proof also does not matter since it is about the
case where the #candidates goes to infinity at the same rate as the #voters.
That is utterly irrelevant to reality. There is a P-time
algorithm for best strategy if C grows like O(logV) or
slower.  That is reality.

Please do not spread this myth further.

-- 
Warren D. Smith
http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking "endorse"
as 1st step)
and
math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html