[EM] More non-altruistic attacks on IRV usage.

[matt welland]

On Sat, 2011-11-26 at 22:31 -0500, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> On 11/26/11 6:58 PM, matt welland wrote:

> > Also, do folks generally see approval as better than or worse than IRV?
> they don't know anything about Approval (or Score or Borda or Bucklin or 
> Condorcet) despite some effort by me to illustrate it regarding the 
> state senate race in our county.

I wasn't clear. I want to hear opinions from the list: Is approval
better or worse than IRV and why?

> unless one were to bullet vote (which would make Approval degenerate to 
> FPTP), there is no way to express one's favorite over other candidates 
> that one approves of.  it forces a burden of tactical voting onto voters 
> who have to decide whether or not they will vote for their 2nd favorite 
> candidate.  i've repeated this over and over and over again on this 
> list.  while Score voting demands too much reflection and information 
> from voters, Approval voting extracts too little information from 
> voters.  both saddle voters with the need for calculation (and strategy) 
> that the ranked ballot does not.  both Score and Approval are 
> non-starters, because of the nature of the ballot.  but a ranked ballot 
> is not a non-starter, even if we lost it recently here in Burlington.  
> we just need to unlearn what FairVote did and decouple the concept of 
> ranked-choice voting from IRV.

When you say approval and score are non-starters due to the ballot, what
exactly do you mean?