[EM] I could use some help with advocacy.

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 15/04/2021 19.56, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
> 
> 
>> On 04/15/2021 12:29 PM Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de> wrote:

>> It's called BTR-IRV in this post:
>> https://election-methods.electorama.narkive.com/LKfc52OI/an-example-of-btr-stv#post4
>> (Electowiki also has a page on it:
>> https://electowiki.org/wiki/Bottom-Two-Runoff_IRV)
>>
>> That's Bottom Two Runoff (but also "better").
>>
>> The term "ranked choice voting" is too ambiguous for me to tell whether
>> you could just move it right over and call the method BTR-RCV. To me,
>> "ranked choice" sounds like just another way of saying "ranked", but of
>> course, FairVote thinks differently.
>>
>> -km
> 
> actually at the top of the thread it was called "BTR-STV".  I
> include a screenshot, but i dunno if the list will pass attachments. i
> considered BTR-RCV but i didn't like two "R"s.  i sent Rob LeGrand an
> email longer ago and i don't think he objected.

I think BTR-STV is the multiwinner generalization. It's also called
STV-ME (e.g.
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2006-June/083621.html).

> My personal favorite Condorcet method is not BTR-STV because it is
> still sequential rounds and does not allow equal ranking of candidates.
>  But as I said on this mailing list at least a couple times: **Some**
> Condorcet RCV is better than any non-Condorcet RCV.

It's algorithmically pretty easy to do equal-rank with BTR-IRV: Just
count the first preferences as fractions of a vote when there's a tie.
(There are other options that may be better still, but they're more
complex.)

This is not as egregrious as fractional Plurality because as soon as all
but one of the equal-ranked candidates have been eliminated, the ballot
counts as full strength for the remaining candidate.

It would be more complex on the vote-counting end, though, so it might
not be worth it.

> Already FairVote is arguing that what happened in Burlington is
> likely to never happen again and happened only once out of something
> like 300 RCV elections.
Steve Eppley's response is probably the best one there: what elections
you get (and how many of them are simple enough for the method to
resolve) depends on what that method is.