<p><br />
<br />
---------------------------- Original Message ----------------------------<br />
Subject: Re: [EM] IRV vs RCV??? responding to the last post,<br />
From: fdpk69p6uq@snkmail.com<br />
Date: Fri, June 30, 2017 8:54 pm<br />
To: election-methods@electorama.com<br />
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br />
<br />
> On Fri, Jun 30, 2017 at 8:19 PM, Sennet Williams wrote:<br />
><br />
>><br />
>> 1st of all, "RCV" is simply a RENAMING of IRV!<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
> No it's not. There are *many* ranked-choice, preferential voting systems,<br />
> and misusing the term to refer exclusively to IRV is dishonest and<br />
> harmful.<br />
</p><p>and FairVote and Rob Richie do that. i've call him on it.</p><p> </p><p>> Many of the other ranked-choice systems are much better, and<br />
> you're intentionally misleading people into thinking that IRV has the same<br />
> benefits that they do (or that there's only one type of reform, and the<br />
> only options are to get behind it or not).<br />
></p><p>and FairVote also does that.</p><p><br />
>> IRV/RCV is the ONLY election reform making progress in America, and it is<br />
>> building faster and faster.<br />
>><br />
><br />
><br />
> Hopefully this trend reverses, as more people do their research and realize<br />
> that IRV is a sham "reform" that only perpetuates two-party domination.<br />
><br />
> FairVote could do so much good if they threw their marketing weight behind<br />
> a voting system that actually worked. :(</p><p>because if liberal cities with strong third parties adopt IRV and it screws up like it did in Burlington Vermont 2009, ranked-choice voting and that kind of election reform will, again, suffer in reputation.</p><p>FairVote would do so much MORE
good if they did not deliberately conflate IRV with RCV and represent that conflation to various governments and organizations regarding election reform.</p><p><br />--</p><p>r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com</p><p>"Imagination is more important than knowledge."</p>