[EM] Bouricius reply, BR, Tideman, recent USA elections

[Jonathan Lundell]

On Nov 8, 2009, at 4:35 PM, Warren Smith wrote:

> Tideman said IRV was unsupportable if it is feasible to compute
> pairwise matrix.  That was
> because Tideman had other voting methods he considered clearly
> superior to IRV and these methods used the pairwise matrix.    By
> "clearly superior" I mean, so superior in every respect, that Tideman
> felt there was no conceivable use for IRV, ever (in situations where
> it was feasible to compute pariwise matrix) where that use could be
> "supported."
> That is what "unsupportable" means.

Tideman ranks IRV highest in resistance to strategy, and generally  
better than the pairwise methods in lucidity and cost of computation.  
How does that translate to those methods being "superior in every  
respect"?