[EM] Reply to an IRVist post on December 17th
KenB
kdbearman at gmail.com
Mon Feb 5 11:42:13 PST 2024
Mr. Ossipoff, here's exactly what you wrote at the start:
Say the election is between Best, Good, &Worst.
…
You rank Best>Good>Worst.
…
Good gets eliminated first, & then Best gets eliminated ...
Then Greg Dennis responded,
... if Good gets eliminated, there are only two candidates (Best and
Worst) remaining, and whichever of those two with the most votes
wins. That sample ballot counts for "Best" in the final round -- it
is never counted for "Worst."
Your response to THAT was irrelevant because he's correct. With three
candidates and no majority winner on the first choices count, the lowest
total is eliminated -- Good, in your example.
That leaves only two candidates, as Mr. Dennis stated. One of them
(assumed) has more votes than the other -- a majority. There's no second
elimination. The election is over. Your vote for Best was counted.
Everything you posted after Mr. Dennis is about your other topic.
- Ken Bearman, Minneapolis MN
On 2/5/2024 1:21 PM, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
> Your next choice after your 1st choice is your 2nd-choice, who is no
> longer there when your 1st choice is determined to lose.
>
> Your next remaining choice at that time is Worst, your 3rd choice.
> That wasn’t FairVote’s promise.
>
> EqualVote has been “out there doing the work”. …but without all the
> wealth that did the work for FairVote. EqualVote are a newer
> organization, & therefore haven’t been “doing the work” for as long.
>
> I merely question the honesty & morality of how FairVote has been
> “doing the work”.
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 11:08 Michael Garman
> <michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>
> “Our cult” are the only people actually out there doing the work.
> Try talking to voters instead of hiding behind your keyboard
> sometime. I recommend it :)
>
> Show me where FairVote explicitly states “second choice” rather
> than “next choice.”
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 7:59 PM Michael Ossipoff
> <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Evidently it’s necessary to repeat that, no, that isn’t what
> FairVote promises. They promise that your ballot will count
> toward your 2nd-choice. Not the same thing. Your ballot, & its
> 2nd-choice ranking of your 2nd-choice didn’t help your 2nd choice.
>
> Your last remaining choice? Undeniably your last remaining
> choice WINS, because your 3rd choice is the only remaining one
> when all of your other choices have lost.
>
> Congratulations, you have the election of your last remaining
> choice !!!
>
> …by your strained dishonest argument.
>
> Your cult isn’t part of the electoral-reform movement.
>
> The leaders of several single-winner-reform organizations met
> in New Orleans, & in that meeting, some of them called Rob
> Richie on the lie. Richie promised to stop telling the lie in
> his promotion of RCV. …but soon resumed doing so.
>
> How do you want me to prove it. It was told to me by someone
> who was there. Sara Wolk, the Director of the EqualVote Coalition.
>
> Shall I ask her for the date of the meeting? I will. Shall I
> ask her for the names of the other participants too? I’ll do
> that too.
>
> We wouldn’t want to lie, would we :-)
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 10:38 Michael Garman
> <michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>
> Your ballot helps your highest remaining choice. That's
> what FairVote promises. Back when this conversation was
> active in December, you cheerfully promised to immediately
> deliver receipts substantiating your claims of deception
> and failed to do so.
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 7:33 PM Michael Ossipoff
> <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Call it what you want, but Worst wins because you
> ranked Best 1st instead of ranking Good 1st.
>
> Contrary to FairVote’s promise, your ballot doesn’t
> help your 2nd choice when your favorite is unable to
> win, because your 2nd choice is no longer there.
>
> FairVote’s promise is an intentional false-statement.
> We have a word for intentional false statements. It’s
> called a lie.
>
> When a lie is used to sell a product to a trusting
> buyer, we have a word for that too. It’s called fraud.
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 08:07 Greg Dennis
> <greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org> wrote:
>
> But if we're being precise, Best could never be
> "eliminated" in your scenario. There would be only
> two candidates left, and so the tallying would
> necessarily end in that round with two candidates.
> Anyone who ranked Best>Good>Worst would have their
> ballot counted towards Best in the final round,
> after Good is eliminated. It would never be
> counted towards Worst.
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 8:50 PM Michael Ossipoff
> <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Greg—
>
> In my example, I said that first Good gets
> eliminated, & then Best gets eliminated.
>
> So all that remains is Worst.
>
> I made a typo in my post. I meant to say that
> the Good-supporters either didn’t vote a 2nd
> choice, or else their 2nd-choice transfer was
> to Worst.
>
> …but, when wrote that, I accidentally said
> “Best-supporters”, when I meant “Good-supporters”.
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024 at 17:18 Greg Dennis
> <greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org> wrote:
>
> Hold on a second, if Good gets eliminated,
> there are only two candidates (Best and
> Worst) remaining, and whichever of those
> two with the most votes wins. That sample
> ballot counts for "Best" in the final
> round -- it is never counted for "Worst."
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 4, 2024, 5:15 PM Michael
> Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I said:
>
> No, it [your ballot] doesn't[count for
> your 2^nd choice] , unless your 2nd
> choice is still there. Oops !!! You &
>
> Richie forgot to include the word "Maybe"
>
> …
>
> Michael Garman said:
>
> …
>
> Fine…it counts for your next highest
> choice still in the running. Which is
>
> also a reasonable interpretation of
> the “next choice” language you cite.
>
> Satisfied?
>
> …
>
> Does that person have any idea what
> he’s saying?
>
> …
>
> Say the election is between Best,
> Good, &Worst.
>
> …
>
> You rank Best>Good>Worst.
>
> …
>
> Good gets eliminated first, & then
> Best gets eliminated, & either hir
> ballots don’t have a 2^nd choice, or
> hir transfers go to Worst. According
> to our friend here, now Good is no
> longer your 2^nd choice. The
> elimination of Good makes Worst your
> 2^nd choice, & so FairVote’s promise
> is kept:Your 2^nd choice, Worst is
> elected !!
>
> …
>
> Oh, but wait, it gets even better:
>
> …
>
> Worst isn’t only your 2^nd choice
> now:By our IRVist friend’s definition
> of “choice”, now Worst becomes your
> 1^st choice (because he’s the only
> remaining candidate).
>
> …
>
> Congratulations !! You’ve elected your
> 1^st choice, Worst !!!~
>
> …
>
> Ladies & Gentlemen of the jury: I
> present to you exhibit B, further
> confirmation of the universal
> astounding dishonesty of the promotion
> of RCV.
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see
> https://electorama.com/em for list info
>
>
>
> --
> *Greg Dennis, Ph.D. :: Policy Director*
> Voter Choice Massachusetts
>
> e :: greg.dennis at voterchoicema.org
> p :: 617.835.9161 <tel:617.835.9161>
> w :: voterchoicema.org
> <https://www.voterchoicema.org/>
>
> :: Follow us on Facebook
> <https://www.facebook.com/yeson2rcv> and Twitter
> <https://twitter.com/yeson2rcv> ::
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see
> https://electorama.com/em for list info
>
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - seehttps://electorama.com/em for list info
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240205/059c78ba/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Election-Methods
mailing list