<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
Some little misunderstanding here. I have never, in over 40 years
supported IRV, much less cheered for it, as could even be grasped
from the message you quote. And so have never taken any particular
interest in its adoption or discarding. Ranked choice or preference
voting is a necessary but not sufficient condition for a scientific
and democratic election system.<br>
<br>
Richard |Lung.<br>
<br>
<br>
On 05/07/2017 09:06, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:9b419595dc199f41e12fb62997542cad.squirrel@webmail04.register.com"
type="cite">
<p><br>
<br>
---------------------------- Original Message
----------------------------<br>
Subject: Re: [EM] The election methods trade-off
paradox/impossibility theorems paradox.<br>
From: "Richard Lung" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:voting@ukscientists.com"><voting@ukscientists.com></a><br>
Date: Wed, July 5, 2017 3:46 am<br>
To: "Kristofer Munsterhjelm" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:km_elmet@t-online.de"><km_elmet@t-online.de></a><br>
Cc: "EM" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com"><election-methods@lists.electorama.com></a><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
><br>
> No doubt you are safe in not thinking that is quite right.<br>
> An electoral system that does not get beyond majority
counting, even if<br>
> it employs ranked choice, (as characterised of Arrow
theorem in<br>
> Democracy and New Technology, by Iain McClean) is never
going to achieve<br>
> anything like satisfactory representation. It is a
hang-over of<br>
> monarchism, the notion that democracy is about winners and
losers.<br>
> Democracy and science are about consensus.</p>
<p>democracy is about social choices somehow made or shared with
the people who are enfranchised stakeholders (like citizens or
eligible permanent residents). so somehow we get all 120
million Americans in some virtual room and decide, with some
algorithm that is a function of each voter's choice, a winner is
chosen in such a way that best expresses the will of these
voters.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Richard, we know you are a cheerleader for IRV and that's fine.
Have you heard about jurisdictions that adopted IRV, used it,
and later repealed IRV?<br>
<br>
<br>
--</p>
<p>r b-j <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com">rbj@audioimagination.com</a></p>
<p>"Imagination is more important than knowledge."</p>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://electorama.com/em">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Richard Lung.
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.voting.ukscientists.com">http://www.voting.ukscientists.com</a>
Democracy Science series 3 free e-books in pdf:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://plus.google.com/106191200795605365085">https://plus.google.com/106191200795605365085</a>
E-books in epub format:
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/democracyscience">https://www.smashwords.com/profile/view/democracyscience</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>