[EM] New MN court affidavits by those defending non-Monotonic voting methods & IRV/STV

[Greg]

Kathy,

>> Top-two runoff is equivalent to IRV when
>> there are three candidates.
>
> Your statement above is provably false and very simply so. IRV and
> top-two runoff are nowhere even close to "equivalent".  Read my
> affidavit from a month ago or my paper on the flaws of IRV or any of
> Abd'ul's emails, or just think about it for a while.

You have often cited Warren Smith as one of the experts who "peer
reviewed" your prior arguments. I don't always agree with Warren, but
I do on this point. To quote from one of his pages:

  "But the delayed and instant runoff systems happen to be
mathematically equivalent if the voters are consistent between rounds
and if there are ≤3 candidates."
  http://rangevoting.org/Peru06.html

You disagree, claiming they are "nowhere even close to equivalent."
Nowhere! Should you be letting someone peer-review your papers who you
makes a statement you deem "provably false and very simply so?" I
don't know how you can continue to contradict yourself in this way.