[EM] Warren needs to double check his work.

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 06/24/2013 09:33 PM, David L Wetzell wrote:
> There should be a few more fewer ranks in the red in his example.
> http://rangevoting.org/IrvIgnoreExample.html
>
> Also, I don't think voters care that much if their deeper preferences
> aren't consulted when their top prefs get elected or come in 2nd place
> and so it seems contrived to make a big deal out of it.  This does get
> at why little is lost when only 3 rankings are allowed with IRV, which
> then makes it easier to use those rankings as approval votes for a first
> round that reduces the number of candidates much more quickly.

One man might say: "This does get at why little is lost when only 3 
rankings are allowed with IRV".
The other man might say: "This does get at why full IRV is not much 
better than 3-candidate IRV".