[EM] Why I Prefer IRV to Condorcet

[Chris Benham]

Greg,
I've come to the strong view that truncation (e.g. bullet voting)
without order-reversal  shouldn't really qualify as a (insincere)
"strategy". 

I don't see any point or use in us trying to distinguish between:
truncation because the voter is sincerely ambivalent or has no 
preference among the unranked candidates, truncation because 
the voter's preferences among the unranked candidates are too 
weak for her to be bothered recording, or truncation because the 
voter fears being stung by later-harm or is deliberately concealing 
a clear pairwise preference in a diabolical scheme to thwart the 
election of a  shining sincere Condorcet winner.

I agree that resistance to Burying is atractive and  IRV's big selling
point versus Condorcet methods.  

Chris Benham


Greg Dennis wrote (Sat.Nov.22):
Perhaps intuitiveness is a bit in the eyes of the beholder, but I'll
tell you the strategies I find intuitive:

- Burying a candidate with strong first choice support
- Bullet voting for a candidate with strong first choice support
- A compromise in which you switch your first choice vote to a
candidate who has stronger first choice support.

-snip-

...I have grown to believe resistance to burying essential. 

-snip-


      Start your day with Yahoo!7 and win a Sony Bravia TV. Enter now http://au.docs.yahoo.com/homepageset/?p1=other&p2=au&p3=tagline
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20081124/7a75a68d/attachment-0003.htm>