[EM] Reply to an IRVist post on December 17th

[Michael Ossipoff]

On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 11:41 Michael Garman <michael.garman at rankthevote.us>
wrote:

>
>
> If D is eliminated first, your ballot counts for G vs. R in round 2.
>

The promise was about when 1st choice can’t win. When it’s determined that
Green’s votecount loses to Republican’s votecount, Your next-ranked choice,
the Democrat, is no longer there. Contrary to FairVote’s promise, you
didn’t help hir.

The dishonesty of that false promise is recognized throughout the electoral
reform movement.

Continuing to talk to a cult-Irvist is pointless.



> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 8:39 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 11:26 Michael Garman <
>> michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>>
>>>
>> Your next choice is your next highest choice in the running. That’s
>>> pretty self-evident.
>>>
>>
>> No, what’s evident is that FairVote promises that, if your favorite is
>> the Green, & you rank sincerely, Green>Democrat>Republican, your ballot
>> will count for the Democrat if the Green can’t win.
>>
>> No one but you interprets it to mean that your ballot will help your
>> 3rd-choice, the Republican to win.
>>
>> No one but you interprets that promise to mean the Republican as your
>> next choice.
>>
>> Your dishonest contortions are cultish.
>>
>>>
>>> I did forget about EqualVote, but what has EqualVote accomplished?
>>> Honest question. I haven’t seen anything of a grassroots presence from
>>> them. If I’m wrong, correct me — their mission is admirable.
>>>
>>> It’s certainly not a stretch to say that the overwhelming majority of
>>> legislative and ballot-measure electoral reform accomplishments belong to
>>> FairVote and allies.
>>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 8:22 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
>>> 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 2nd 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 2nd 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 2nd
>>>>>>>>>>>> choice, & so FairVote’s promise is kept:  Your 2nd choice,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Worst is elected !!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Oh, but wait, it gets even better:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Worst isn’t only your 2nd choice now:  By our IRVist friend’s
>>>>>>>>>>>> definition of “choice”, now Worst becomes your 1st choice
>>>>>>>>>>>> (because he’s the only remaining candidate).
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> …
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Congratulations !! You’ve elected your 1st 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
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240205/2189629c/attachment-0001.htm>