<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=windows-1252">
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.2800.1226" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Mea culpa for sloppy thinking/writing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The other day I suggested (quite incorrectly) that IRV
was equivalent to Borda, when the only conclusion I should've drawn from a
specific analysis was quite different than that statement. I can only blame
laziness on a slow Saturday afternoon for that error.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>It turns out that the algorithm I was analyzing only had a
superficial resemblance to IRV, and I had labeled it IRV without checking to see
what it really was. I still don't know which it was but will not compound my
error by trying to match it to a set of abbreviations. What the algorithm I was
looking at had in common with IRV is that of "transferable votes", and the only
conclusion that can be drawn from the analysis is that the process of
transferring votes upward in a ranking is the same as increasing the Borda Count
for remaining candidates (by moving eliminated candidates to the end of the
list). </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>So, my original comment was appropriate to the process used in
IRV iterations being the same as the process used to assign Borda Counts at any
particular stage in an iterative method, and my observation should've been that
iteration in an STV process is identical to that used to identify Borda Counts
at a given stage. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>The first counterexample was unconvincing, since there was a
majority winner from the beginning and therefore no iterations in IRV. The
second counterexample pointed out the mistake in my original assertion - IRV
eliminated the alternative in the first round that would have been relevant in
my analysis of round 2. So whatever I was looking at was not "IRV."</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks very much to the ones who helped me identify the error. </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Paul Kislanko<BR></FONT></DIV><BR></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>