[EM] Poll, preliminary ballots

[robert bristow-johnson]

> The payoff is that RCIPE would not have failed in Burlington and Alaska!>  That's huge.Any Condorcet method would have that huge payoff.  What "huge" benefit does RCIPE have that a simpler Condorcet method doesn't have?Like Condorcet-Plurality or Condorcet-TTR?Or MinMax?I'm not sure it's agreed or wisely assumed that this poll is about the most preferable method for public, governmental election (where the stakes are high and voters have a partisan interest to maximize their own political interests), but I'm sorta assuming that.Then when choosing a method to promote, the actual correctness and fairness of the method is paramount.Then the *perception* of fairness of the method by the public and by policy makers is important.  To satisfy that concern, the method needs to be clear and understandable to the public and to policy makers.  This is necessary to get legislation passed.Hare RCV may have a simpler procedure, the Single Transferable Vote, but it doesn't have a simple *pri
 nciple* of ethic that it's actually faithful to.  Its ethic is its procedure, the STV, essentially saying "This is the right thing to do since this is what we're doing and this is always we had done it.". But that's no justification.  It's circular.Condorcet is based primarily on the principle of "One-Person-One-Vote", that our votes must count equally.  No enfranchised voter deserves to have their vote count less than some other enfranchised voter.But that means Majority Rule must apply (I don't mean the "majority criterion").  This means that, at the end of the day, if more voters prefer A to B, then B is not elected.  If B is elected, then the fewer voters who preferred B had cast votes that were more effective than those larger number of voters preferring A.IRV is not committed to that simple ethic, whereas Condorcet is committed to it.  This is essentially the Condorcet criterion.So then the secondary concern would be public perception as well as that of policy makers.  
 These secondary concerns are the only concerns that differentiate Condorcet methods.  It's about how to justify to people why the CW is the right choice to elect.  And what rationale there exists for the rare event electing someone when the CW does not exist.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240418/4cfc8e80/attachment-0001.htm>