[EM] Burlington VT reconsidering IRV 10 years after IRV failed to elect the Condorcet Winner

Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_elmet at t-online.de
Wed Dec 4 15:34:38 PST 2019

On 04/12/2019 21.06, Markus Schulze wrote:
> Dear Robert Bristow-Johnson,
> the best possible election method according to the
> underlying heuristic of instant-runoff voting will
> always be instant-runoff voting. Therefore, I don't
> think that any supporter of instant-runoff voting
> will be convinced by a hybrid of Condorcet voting
> and instant-runoff voting.

I think the point is to convince people who support IRV but also
recognize the failure of Burlington 2009 as genuine. From such a
position, it makes sense to advocate for a small change that fixes the
problem of Condorcet noncompliance, instead of replacing IRV with Schulze.

In the category of smaller changes, I would prefer Benham (which I got
confused with Woodall earlier), but even that might be too large a
change (as I said in my initial mail to Robert).

Does Benham pass independence of clones?

On a longer term, I agree that Schulze is better than Woodall or Benham
(perhaps with the exception if the voters are very strategic), but it
doesn't seem Robert has the luxury of going for one of the advanced
Condorcet methods.

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list