[EM] Poll, preliminary ballots

[Kevin Venzke]

Hi Kristofer,

Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de> a écrit :
> What do you think of BTR-IRV in that respect? Or Borda-elimination? 
> Neither explicitly checks for a Condorcet winner.

I don't think these are similar. The RCIPE advocate only asks for a rule change that
seems modest and logical within the context of IRV: If the candidate was destined to
lose *in IRV* anyway, then eliminate him sooner. In exchange, RCIPE achieves quite a
lot.

With BTR-IRV I don't think any IRV fan will be persuaded, as it can't be explained
why the bottom two candidates should challenge each other in a way that normally
only occurs in IRV's final two. And if I put my Condorcet hat back on, I don't get
it either, why it would make sense to arrive at Condorcet that way.

> Trying not to spam, but I also forgot to say: Copeland-elimination 
> should be Condorcet and it works like RCIPE in the absence of any lower 
> cycles. (Break the tie by first preference count when there is a cycle.)

Sure. I think there is a world where RCIPE is the right thing to advocate, and
that's the cleverness I see there. But this could also be true for Copeland
elimination.

Kevin
votingmethods.net