[EM] No. Condorcet and Hare do not share the same problem with computational complexity and process transparency.

[Michael Garman]

Also, regarding the Otis interview, here's the transcript
<https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2024/03/19/could-ranked-choice-voting-take-the-poison-out-of-politics>.
This is her description of the tabulation process. No lies detected.
[image: image.png]

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 7:02 PM Michael Garman <
michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:

> I accessed the page on desktop instead of mobile and found the text you
> quoted. That's incorrect, I agree. FairVote should change the language they
> use.
>
> However, I will tell you -- as someone who has talked to thousands of
> people previously opposed to the concept of any electoral reform and
> convinced them of the advantages of IRV over the current system -- that I
> have never once used the misleading verbiage on the FairVote site, nor have
> any of the many other IRV activists with whom I regularly interact.
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 6:55 PM Michael Garman <
> michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>
>> Where are you seeing the material you quoted? I agree that what you’re
>> quoting is inaccurate. However, here’s what I see when I click your link.
>>
>>
>> Ballots that *do not help voters’ top choices* win count for their next
>> choice.
>>
>> there’s a difference between “if your first choice doesn’t win, your
>> ballot counts for your next choice” (wrong) and “if your ballot isn’t being
>> used to support your first choice, it’s being used to support your next
>> choice still in the running” (accurate)
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 6:48 PM robert bristow-johnson <
>> rbj at audioimagination.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>> > On 03/20/2024 1:04 PM EDT Michael Garman <
>>> michael.garman at rankthevote.us> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > No, they were promised that if their first-choice candidate was out of
>>> the running, their vote would count for their second choice. Important
>>> distinction!
>>> >
>>>
>>> Michael, you cannot be both honest and informed.  What you just said is
>>> false.
>>>
>>> From https://fairvote.org/our-reforms/ranked-choice-voting/
>>>
>>> "With RCV, voters can sincerely rank candidates in order of preference.
>>> Voters know that if their first choice doesn’t win, their vote
>>> automatically counts for their next choice instead. This frees voters from
>>> worrying about how others will vote and which candidates are more or less
>>> likely to win.
>>>
>>> Candidates can compete without fear of “splitting the vote” with
>>> like-minded individuals."
>>>
>>> Just tell the truth.  I'm not Michael Ossipoff, but I am also just tired
>>> of this shit.  Yesterday they had Deb Otis on the WBUR radio show On
>>> Point.  Lie, lie, lie, lie...
>>>
>>> If you can't be honest with us about the promise they make about RCV and
>>> the actual performance, nobody should have a conversation with you.  It's
>>> like talking to a Trumper.
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com
>>>
>>> "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
>>>
>>> .
>>> .
>>> .
>>> ----
>>> 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/20240320/bb0863a3/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IMG_2770.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 300883 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240320/bb0863a3/attachment-0001.jpg>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image.png
Type: image/png
Size: 135416 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240320/bb0863a3/attachment-0001.png>