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

[Michael Garman]

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/a1aa7902/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/a1aa7902/attachment-0001.jpg>