[EM] IRV vs Plurality

[Kathy Dopp]

Oh. OK. I thought you were using the word partisan in the typical
sense of political party adherent which I am not.

OK. I agree that I am a strong adherent of voting rights so naturally
oppose IRV/STV as removing the rights of voters to participate in the
final decision-making process, removing the rights of voters to cast a
vote that positively affects the chances of candidates to win,
eviscerates the rights of voters to check the accuracy of the election
outcomes, etc.

Fine. I am a partisan bulldog for the rights of voters to have a fair
voting method, to be able to verify that the vote counting process is
accurate, and the rights of the voters to participate in the selection
of who represents them. However, I fight against any scheme that
violates those rights, esp. where others seem not to recognize the
threats, not just against the threat of IRV/STV which is only one such
threat.

So most people would not use the word "partisan" to characterize my
volunteer efforts, and not in the negative sense that you characterize
them, but OK, thanks for teaching me a new meaning for the word
"partisan".

Kathy

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 11:22 AM, robert bristow-johnson
<rbj at audioimagination.com> wrote:
>
> On Jan 15, 2010, at 9:47 AM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 1:44 AM, robert bristow-johnson
>> <rbj at audioimagination.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Kathy may make mistakes, but I'd be astonished to find her lying.
>>>
>>> she's pretty partisan (as am i), now i don't even remember what she said
>>> that i found so hard to believe.
>>
>> Really!!??  Since I've never contributed or participated with *any*
>> campaign and my work has been completely nonpartisan,
>
> you're *very* partisan about the IRV vs. Plurality/Deleayed_runoff debate.
>  you are soooo anti-IRV that you have absolutely no recognition of the
> *well* *known* problems regarding Plurality in a multiparty, multi-candidate
> election.  you are sooooo anti-IRV that you
>
> "partisan" doesn't have to mean Dem vs GOP (or Prog vs. Libertarian
> whatever).  your unbending, not completely thoughtful (or at least thought
> out) positions (actually it position, singular) about this is precisely what
> identifies you as a bulldog.  a partisan bulldog.
>
> that's what you are.
>
>
>> since you claim *again* to be able to read my mind better than I can,
>
>
>
>> what political party do I belong to and am I so partisan with?
>
> see above.
>
> you are in the rabid anti-IRV party.
>
> it's someone else, but are tea-baggers partisan?  they're not Dem or GOP.
>  at least they claim not.
>
>>
>> I did go to a particular political party convention
>
> pftttt...
>
>
>> Your deep confusion of your own imagination and reality is truly
>> astonishing Robert.
>
> yes it is.  whatever you say.
>
> you complain about IRV.  i do too, you ignore it.
>
> you complain about IRV, i offer plausible resolution to what we all
> recognize as problematic, but since it isn't the simplistic reversion to the
> old-fashioned FPTP that so heavily favors the two-party system, you ignore
> and infer that i am an IRV partisan (i think Terry wishes i *was*, but he
> has known for months that i am highly critical of it).  but i continue to
> recognize the reasons we ditched FPTP and adopted IRV in the first place
> (for just the mayoral race).  *those* are totally legit reasons and you have
> shown no acknowledgment of any of it.  you have made several factually
> incorrect statements, and when the content of those factually incorrect
> statements started being about me, my positions, and what i have said, i
> started to become incredulous.  NO ONE, reading this list or anything i said
> at FairVote (hell, i was arguing with Rob Richie himself) or in the local
> Burlington blogs, can credibly claim that i think that IRV is the solution.
>
> but IRV is still better than FPTP for the multiparty, multi-candidate
> context.
>
> but, if for a partisan bulldog, it's hard to listen.
>
>
> --
>
> r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com
>
> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
>
>
>
>
>



-- 

Kathy Dopp

Town of Colonie, NY 12304
phone 518-952-4030
cell 518-505-0220

http://utahcountvotes.org
http://electionmathematics.org
http://kathydopp.com/serendipity/

Realities Mar Instant Runoff Voting
http://electionmathematics.org/ucvAnalysis/US/RCV-IRV/InstantRunoffVotingFlaws.pdf

Voters Have Reason to Worry
http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf

Checking election outcome accuracy --- Post-election audit sampling
http://electionmathematics.org/em-audits/US/PEAuditSamplingMethods.pdf