<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Tahoma
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'>
To say that IRV fails FBC is an understatement.<br><br>IRV fails FBC with a vengeance.<br><br>IRV thereby makes a joke any election in which it is used.<br><br>As I've already said, all it takes is for favoriteness-support to taper moderately gradually away from the middle, something<br>that is hardly unusual. Eliminations from the extremes will send transfers inward to feed the candidates flanking a middle CW,<br>resulting in hir elimination.<br><br>If you think that you likely need a compromise to beat someone worse, then you had better vote hir in 1st place, burying<br>your favorite, lest your favorite eliminate your compromise and then lose to someone worse than the compromise.<br><br>This would be observed in a quite high percentage of IRV elections if the relevant information were disclosed in the<br>election results report.<br><br>And the attempts of IRVists to evade or excuse its precinct-non-countability testify only to their determination to try to defend IRV regardless<br>of what contortions that defense requires.<br><br>And no, I don't claim that all of the methods that I like and propose are precinct-countable. But precinct-countability remains<br>a significant advantage of Approval over IRV.<br><br>If I propose a method that isn't precinct countable, then I had better show some reason why it's very good. <br><br>Mike Ossipoff<br><br> </div></body>
</html>