[Election-Methods] RELEASE: Instant Runoff Voting

[Aaron Armitage]

--- On Mon, 7/28/08, James Gilmour <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk> wrote:

> That all ranked ballot voting systems must be assessed
> using criteria and tests that can be applied to them all,
> is your view, and
> it may be the view of others.  But I would suggest it
> ignores some fundamental differences between the voting
> systems.  IRV in
> particular makes no pretence at complying with a range of
> social choice criteria  -  it is a complete different kind
> of voting
> system.

I find this a really astonishing thing to say. IRV and all other ranked
choice systems ask for the same input from voters and produce the same kind
of output, namely a single winner. For you to say they differ so
fundamentally that no common standard can be appealed to looks an awful lot
like special pleading. And how can you argue that we should adopt IRV
instead of Condorcet or Borda or Bucklin if you have to common standard
from which to argue that IRV is better? Or is it only the criteria that
put IRV in a bad light that are irrelevant?