[Election-Methods] IRV ballot is at least as fair as FPTP ballot

[Chris Benham]

Kathy Dopp wrote:

Kathy Dopp kathy.dopp at gmail.com 
Sat May 3 21:29:19 PDT 2008 

"..However, even despite some voters using strategy because they realize
that IRV fundamentally does not work the way it is intended to, you
will undoubtedly find ample number of cases of candidates "winning"
elections who were not preferred by most voters. .."


Kathy,
In a previous post I  nit-picked an anti-IRV example you gave. Yes, it is
possible for  IRV to elect a candidate that is apparently not the
strongest.
31: A>B
32: B>C
37: C
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2007-December/021192.html

What exactly does your phrase "not preferred by most voters" mean (or refer to)?
Does it just refer to  IRV's failure of the Condorcet criterion?
The  Alternative Vote  (voters strictly rank from the top however many or few candidates they wish,
until one remains eliminate the  remaining candidate that is top ranked among remaining candidates on 
the fewest ballots) has a maximal set of positive properties. 

Therefore to credibly attack  (this version of) IRV, you might like to tell us which of  it's positive 
properties you think  are less valuable than ones you prefer and maybe give an example of  a
precisely defined method that you claim is better.


Chris Benham


      Get the name you always wanted with the new y7mail email address. www.yahoo7.com.au/y7mail