[EM] Is it professional?

Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_elmet at lavabit.com
Mon Jun 24 13:28:38 PDT 2013

On 06/24/2013 05:08 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
> To ignore the simple upgrade to IRV that I have proffered
> and defended at length on this list-serve,
>   when you argue against IRV?

Yes, for many reasons. Among them: because other simple upgrades give 
way greater bang for the buck.

Consider BTR-IRV: It's like IRV, except when eliminating, you don't 
remove the Plurality loser. Instead, you eliminate, of the two with 
worst Plurality results for that round, whoever is ranked below the 
other on the most ballots.

That's two sentences, and boom, Condorcet compliance (and thus 
resistance against Burlington scenarios).

I can hear the counter: "But it's not IRV! It doesn't have momentum!" 
But whatever force that counter has against BTR-IRV, it also has against 
your unproven hybrid.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list