[EM] ElectoramaWeekly for May 20 published; maybe looking more closely at software next week

Fri May 22 20:00:18 PDT 2026

Hi Richard,

Sorry to see that RCTabPlus wasn't on the Software page.  It's there now.
Back when we were editing the March newsletter, I didn't entirely remove
RCTabPlus, but I pretty aggressively summarized it
https://electowiki.org/wiki/ElectoramaNews/2026-March#RCTabPlus

You'll note that a lot of your original prose ended up on a new "RCTabPlus"
article that I created on electowiki:
https://electowiki.org/wiki/RCTabPlus

Rob

On Fri, May 22, 2026 at 10:52 AM Richard <electionmethods at votefair.org>
wrote:

> On 5/20/26 23:45, Rob Lanphier via Election-Methods wrote:
>  > What software is missing from that page?  Is there any software that
>  > deserves to be highlighted by ElectoramaNews and/or
>  > ElectoramaWeekly ...?
>
> Missing from that list is the RCTabPlus software.
>
> I wrote a summary of it in your March newsletter, but my description was
> removed before that newsletter was published.  Here's what I wrote:
>
>
> RCTabPlus software was announced in a graphic titled Ranked Choice
> Voting Plus posted in r/EndFPTP. This open-source software is at:
> Github/CPSolver/RCTabPlus
>
> RCTabPlus extends the RCTab election-grade software used by the RCVRC
> (Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center) when they assist a US
> jurisdiction with adopting ranked choice voting. RCTabPlus adds these
> two options to both single-winner (IRV) and multi-winner (STV) ranked
> choice voting:
>
>      Overvote Rule: Count when single continuing
>
>      Eliminate pairwise losing candidates
>
> The better overvote rule dramatically reduces the need to teach voters
> to avoid overvotes (two or more marks in the same rank column).
>
> The pairwise-losing-candidate elimination (which works in both STV and
> IRV elections) provides multiple benefits including: ensures majority
> support for the IRV winner, eliminates the center squeeze effect,
> dramatically reduces Condorcet failures, defeats political tactics that
> exploit vote splitting, and eliminates the need for a voter to consider
> whether their ballot will get stuck supporting their
> favorite-but-less-popular candidate while their second-favorite
> candidate gets eliminated.
>
>
>  > ... deserves to be highlighted ... and if so, why?  ...
>
> RCTabPlus is very important because it provides a direct path for
> building on the resources provided by the RCTab software, which is
> maintained by the Ranked Choice Voting Resource Center.
>
> This resource is essential because when a jurisdiction adopts "ranked
> choice voting" the state's or county's election-system vendor needs
> election-grade software against which they can test their election
> software (which is what's actually used in all US elections) to make
> sure it complies with the new law that a city council or state
> legislature passes.
>
> Importantly, both RCTabPlus and RCTab read the official "cast vote
> record" data used in actual elections.  Also note the RCTabPlus and
> RCTab software includes real election data in formats recognized by
> election-system vendors.
>
> If the RCTabPlus software had been available when Portland adopted
> ranked choice voting (IRV for mayor and STV for city council) it would
> have been possible to adopt the better overvote rule.  That refinement
> would have saved lots of money otherwise spent educating Portland voters
> not to mark more than one candidate in each "rank" column of ovals.
>
> I believe this simple election-reform path is even simpler than adopting
> approval voting.
>
> This "plus" version of ranked choice voting overcomes the only two
> meaningful criticisms of IRV from STAR voting fans.
>
> And the elimination of pairwise losing candidates almost always elects
> the Condorcet winner.
>
> Every jurisdiction considering adopting ranked choice voting should
> become aware of these two options that are now available as additions to
> RCVRC's election-grade RCTab software, which is used to validate real
> election software.
>
> IMO the RCTabPlus election-grade software is very important!
>
> Richard Fobes
> The VoteFair guy
>
>
>
> On 5/20/26 23:45, Rob Lanphier via Election-Methods wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > ElectoramaWeekly for May 20 has been published:
> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Msq9aZA7VAI <https://www.youtube.com/
> > watch?v=Msq9aZA7VAI>
> >
> > In this week's episode, Taylor Eigen Fisher, Carlo Estefano, and I took
> > a closer look at Ohio SB395 (the bill proposing Condorcet elections in
> > Ohio), which you can read about on electowiki:
> > https://electowiki.org/wiki/Ohio#SB395 <https://electowiki.org/wiki/
> > Ohio#SB395>
> >
> > A slightly overlapping group of folks also attended this month's
> > ElectoramaCall, where we discussed future work both on the
> > ElectoramaNews newsletter, and possible topics for ElectoramaWeekly
> > (e.g. folks for us to interview).  One thing we discussed in the latter
> > part of the call was possibly focusing on software (both on
> > ElectoramaWeekly and ElectoramaNews).  As a result, I've done a bit of
> > work on the "Software" page on electowiki:
> > https://electowiki.org/wiki/Software <
> https://electowiki.org/wiki/Software>
> >
> > What software is missing from that page?  Is there any software that
> > deserves to be highlighted by ElectoramaNews and/or ElectoramaWeekly
> > (and if so, why)?  Is software a good topic, or should we instead focus
> > on one of the other topics we discussed (e.g. the gutting of the Voting
> > Rights Act)?
> >
> > Rob
> >
> > ----
> > 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/20260522/8cc3326b/attachment.htm>