[EM] IRV3/AV3

David L Wetzell wetzelld at gmail.com
Tue Nov 1 13:10:37 PDT 2011


On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 11:01 AM, Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>wrote:

>
>
> 2011/11/1 David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
>
>> I believe there have to be only 3 candidates  and it has to be a close
>> 3-way election for the 20% to be valid.
>
>
> And the candidates must not be organized along a one-dimensional
> ideological spectrum. That restriction does not hold for many partisan
> elections, thus the percentage can be significantly higher than 20% for
> close elections.
>

Can you point to the actual article for me?  I've heard o.w. wrt the
"one-dim spectrum" in terms of the top candidates, as opposed to all of the
candidates.

>
>
>> As long as the odds are low enuf, it doesn't matter that much.  It just
>> says that in some cases, some folks will have sour grapes.
>>
>> And over time and place, such possible biases will get evened out...
>>
>
> Also not true. There is an clear overall bias against centrists. If you
> want, I can pull up the citations in my zotero...
>

I'd say it fits with how IRV tends to keep a two-party dominated system in
place.

This bias though is not as bad when one considers that the big two parties
can be more dynamic, moving towards the center in response to the
possibility of a "centrist" party spoiling an election.

Same thing for you Andy J, in real life, there's more policy-variables
involved.  The potential for Party mergers can take a bite out of the
Prog-Dem dilemma.  Even if the Progs won in 2008 with IRV, by the next
election the voting habits would have shifted to take care of the problem.

Models are like swimsuits, what they reveal is interesting but what they
conceal is often vital...
dlw

>
> JQ
>
>
>> Nonmonotonicity is no good reason to bring back the use of FPTP.
>>
> Agreed.
>
>
>> It was used for pragmatic reasons by those who were upset by how IRV was
>> improving the democracy of Burlington, VT.
>>
> For at least many voters, the non-Condorcet result was their honest reason
> for voting for repeal. I don't think it helps to accuse them of mere
> partisanship.
>
> JQ
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20111101/433e7b3b/attachment-0004.htm>


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list