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

Mon Feb 5 12:04:28 PST 2024

Are you being deliberately dense here?

The scenario, as you've laid it out, is as follows:

There are *three* candidates: G, D, and R. You rank G > D > R.

If R is eliminated first, the final tally is between G and D. Your vote
counts for your first choice, G.

If D is eliminated first, the final tally is between G and R. Your vote
counts for your first choice, G.

If G is eliminated first, the final tally is between D and R. Your vote
counts for your second choice, D.

Thus, your vote doesn't count for R under any circumstance. Oops!!

On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 9:02 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 11:57 Michael Garman <michael.garman at rankthevote.us>
> wrote:
>
>> Okay, so G can't win. Move your eyes up to the very previous sentence I
>> wrote.
>>
>> > If G is eliminated first, your ballot counts for D vs. R in round 2.
>>
>
> Yes: “IF”.
>
> Oops!! FairVote forgot to say “maybe” or “if…”.
>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 8:55 PM Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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 2nd choice. The elimination of Good makes Worst your 2
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> nd 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/20240205/9f2438de/attachment-0001.htm>