<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"></head><body>
<div><br></div><div>Thank you Brian for doing this. Looks like Leno is the legit winner and STV and Condorcet agree.</div><div><br></div><div>However, the Leno-Breed pair wise tally in the defeat matrix should be exactly the same as the STV final round result. So something is wrong somewhere.</div><div><br></div><div>But thanks for doing this. I was about to code up a MATLAB program to parse and count this thing.</div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div id="composer_signature"><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8"><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">--</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">r b-j rbj@audioimagination.com</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757">"Imagination is more important than knowledge."</div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div><div style="font-size:85%;color:#575757"><br></div></div><br><br>-------- Original message --------<br>From: Brian Olson <bql@bolson.org> <br>Date: 6/10/2018 7:46 AM (GMT-08:00) <br>To: EM <election-methods@lists.electorama.com> <br>Subject: Re: [EM] RCV in SF Mayoral election <br><br><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:times new roman,serif">Ok, a few lines of Python poking the raw data shows I must have some bug in my Condorcet implementation. Digging into that...</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Jun 10, 2018 at 10:08 AM, Greg Dennis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org" target="_blank">greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"><div>Brian, how is it possible that those differ? Since all the other candidates are eliminated in the final round, shouldn't that necessarily be the same as the pairwise contest between those two?</div><div><div class="h5"><div dir="auto"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr">On Sun, Jun 10, 2018, 9:46 AM Brian Olson <<a href="mailto:bql@bolson.org" target="_blank">bql@bolson.org</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_default" style="font-family:"times new roman",serif">I processed the latest data (2018-06-09) and posted the results of the SF Mayor election using a few algorithms:</div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif"><a href="https://bolson.org/~bolson/2018/SF_Mayor_20180605.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://bolson.org/~bolson/<wbr>2018/SF_Mayor_20180605.html</a></font><br></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif">The Condorcet win is now 97436 to 91740 for Leno over Breed.</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif">The IRV final round is still just 94783 to 94393.</font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif"><br></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><font face="times new roman, serif">I'm using my software posted at <a href="https://github.com/brianolson/voteutil" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/<wbr>brianolson/voteutil</a></font></div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">commands (needs maven installed for compiling Java, and needs Python3):</div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default"><div class="gmail_default">curl -O <a href="http://www.sfelections.org/results/20180605/data/20180609/20180609_ballotimage.txt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sfelections.org/<wbr>results/20180605/data/<wbr>20180609/20180609_ballotimage.<wbr>txt</a></div><div class="gmail_default">curl -O <a href="http://www.sfelections.org/results/20180605/data/20180609/20180609_masterlookup.txt" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.sfelections.org/<wbr>results/20180605/data/<wbr>20180609/20180609_<wbr>masterlookup.txt</a></div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div><div class="gmail_default">(mkdir -p ~/psrc && cd ~/psrc && git clone <a href="https://github.com/brianolson/voteutil.git" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://github.com/brianolson/<wbr>voteutil.git</a> && cd ~/psrc/voteutil/java && mvn package)</div><div class="gmail_default">python3 ~/psrc/voteutil/python/<wbr>rcvToNameEq.py -m 20180609_masterlookup.txt -b 20180609_ballotimage.txt -o 20180609_%s.nameq</div><div class="gmail_default">java -jar ~/psrc/voteutil/java/target/<wbr>voteutil-1.0.0.jar --rankings --full-html --explain -i 20180609_Mayor.nameq >/tmp/a.html</div><div class="gmail_default"><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 9:33 PM, Greg Dennis <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org</a><wbr>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><span style="font-size:small;text-decoration-style:initial;text-decoration-color:initial;float:none;display:inline">I quickly looked at the vote data and saw that lots of ballots are categorized as "Exhausted by Over Votes" and "Under Votes," but there is no data indicating exactly how those ballots were marked, so we lack enough information to be sure of final results.</span></blockquote><div><br></div></span><div>Actually, all the data you need is available from that page. The "Ballot Image" file will give you the full cast vote record of every individual ballot, and the "Master Lookup" is the legend that tells you what each number means. If you have trouble interpreting the numbers, just ping me!</div><div><div class="m_6667562183132606041m_3946236845008707540h5"><div><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 4:36 PM, VoteFair <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:electionmethods@votefair.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">electionmethods@votefair.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>On 6/9/2018 6:25 AM, Greg Dennis wrote:<br>
> San Francisco always make the cast vote record public:<br>
> <a href="https://sfelections.sfgov.org/june-5-2018-election-results-detailed-reports" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://sfelections.sfgov.org/<wbr>june-5-2018-election-results-<wbr>detailed-reports</a><br>
<br></span>
I quickly looked at the vote data and saw that lots of ballots are categorized as "Exhausted by Over Votes" and "Under Votes," but there is no data indicating exactly how those ballots were marked, so we lack enough information to be sure of final results.<br>
<br>
Converting instant-runoff counts into pairwise counts might be (probably is?) possible, but I don't have time to do that analysis.<span><br>
<br>
> The probability of IRV not elected the Condorcet winner appears to be<br>
> exceedingly low in practice. We're up to about ~200 IRV elections<br>
> conducted nationwide since 2004 and Burlington 2009 is the only<br>
> case so far.<br>
<br></span>
Yes, circular ambiguity -- in which there is no Condorcet winner -- is rare when the number of ballots exceeds a few hundred.<span><br>
<br>
> On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 2:07 AM, robert bristow-johnson<br></span><span>
> <<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.<wbr>com</a>>> wrote:<br>
> the limitation to only three levels of ranking is a problem. if<br>
> someone ranked all three levels and none of the candidates ranked<br>
> were either London Breed nor Mark Leno, that voter was effectively<br>
> "disenfranchised" by being unable to weigh in on the final choice of<br>
> choosing the mayor.<br>
<br></span>
Based on a very quick guesstimate it looks like about 30 or so ballots had this issue. Right?<br>
<br>
That's not a big number, but a fair counting method -- such as pairwise counting -- would not have to discard any ballots.<br>
<br>
The bigger number is "under votes" and admittedly pairwise counting cannot compensate for a voter saying "here is the only acceptable choice" (or two choices in this case).<br>
<br>
It's great that these results are getting analyzed by people who do not drink the FairVote kool-aid.<br>
<br>
In haste,<br>
Richard Fobes<br>
"The VoteFair guy"<span><br>
<br>
<br>
On 6/9/2018 6:25 AM, Greg Dennis wrote:<br>
</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span>
San Francisco always make the cast vote record public:<br>
<a href="https://sfelections.sfgov.org/june-5-2018-election-results-detailed-reports" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://sfelections.sfgov.org/<wbr>june-5-2018-election-results-<wbr>detailed-reports</a><br>
<br>
Based on the most recent analysis of these numbers that I saw, Leno was<br>
indeed the Condorcet winner, and if Breed were to beat Leno in the final<br>
round, she would then necessarily be the Condorcet winner. The<br>
probability of IRV not elected the Condorcet winner appears to be<br>
exceedingly low in practice. We're up to about ~200 IRV elections<br>
conducted nationwide since 2004 and Burlington 2009 is the only case so far.<br>
<br>
On Sat, Jun 9, 2018 at 2:07 AM, robert bristow-johnson<br></span><div><div class="m_6667562183132606041m_3946236845008707540m_8994414804253371469h5">
<<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.<wbr>com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
<br>
Richard, a few points:<br>
<br>
the limitation to only three levels of ranking is a problem. if<br>
someone ranked all three levels and none of the candidates ranked<br>
were either London Breed nor Mark Leno, that voter was effectively<br>
"disenfranchised" by being unable to weigh in on the final choice of<br>
choosing the mayor. however, i think the news media made it clear<br>
that the race was really gonna be between Leno, Breed, and Kim, so<br>
these fringe voters might have a chance to insincerely mark either<br>
Leno or Breed as their 3rd choice and betray their *true* third<br>
choice and, in doing so, have an effect in the final round.<br>
<br>
ignoring the problem of only 3 ranking levels, it is not possible<br>
that London Breed is the Condorcet Winner (a.k.a. "pairwise<br>
champion"). it might be the case that Mark Leno or Jane Kim is the<br>
Condorcet Winner and if the latter is the case, this is another real<br>
indictment against STV or IRV as a method of tallying RCV. and your<br>
reverse namesake, FairVote, is partially (or mostly) to blame.<br>
<br>
i wonder if the City of SF has a file of all of the cast and scanned<br>
ballots and the full ranking for each. if so, and if they release<br>
it to the public, we can investigate if there is a Condorcet Winner<br>
and if that CW is or is not Mark Leno. this would be interesting.<br>
<br>
L8r,<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
r b-j<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
> On 6/8/2018 6:24 PM, Christopher Colosi wrote:<br>
> > ... She stated “This is the system we are working with. That’s<br>
> > a discussion we can have at a later time. For now, we’re stuck<br>
with it.”<br>
> > - insinuating it is not fair. I was quite bothered to have a Dem<br>
in a<br>
> > progressive city insinuate that first past the post is more<br>
fair. ...<br>
><br>
> This remark does not imply support for first past the post (FPTP,<br>
a.k.a<br>
> plurality counting).<br>
><br>
> There are other ways to count the preference marks on "ranked-choice"<br>
> ballots. In particular, pairwise counting could be used instead of<br>
> instant-runoff counting, and that is fairer than FPTP.<br>
><br>
> > 1. May not elect majority candidate<br>
> > ...<br>
> > Is this common? This is<br>
> > probably an abnormally close race. Thoughts?<br>
><br>
> I doubt the voters would regard this as a close race if they had been<br>
> able to fully rank all the choices. The 3-choice limitation is<br>
> simplistic, and complicates the counting.<br>
><br>
> Pairwise counting does not result in any exhausted ballots. Unmarked<br>
> choices are an indication that the choices are equally disliked. And<br>
> multiple candidates being marked at the same preference level is<br>
also no<br>
> problem.<br>
><br>
> In other words, the ballots contain enough information that they<br>
can be<br>
> counted in other ways, besides instant-runoff counting. Those<br>
alternate<br>
> counting methods could reveal a clearer outcome.<br>
><br>
> In haste,<br>
> Richard Fobes<br>
><br>
><br>
> On 6/8/2018 6:24 PM, Christopher Colosi wrote:<br>
>> Curious to hear people’s thoughts on some issues.<br>
>><br>
>> 1. May not elect majority candidate<br>
>> In SF, we restrict to 3 choices to simplify the process. As the vote<br>
>> currently stands, 144 votes separate the top two candidates<br>
(<0.1%) and<br>
>> over 16,000 ballots have been exhausted (all 3 choices eliminated).<br>
>> About 9% of voters have been removed from the pool. It is very<br>
possible<br>
>> that the result would have shifted if they had the opportunity to<br>
rank a<br>
>> 4th candidate, and therefore, it is possible that we won’t elect the<br>
>> person who truly represents the majority. Is this common? This is<br>
>> probably an abnormally close race. Thoughts?<br>
>><br>
>> 2. What are your thoughts on London Breed’s response to being<br>
asked if<br>
>> RCV is fair? She stated “This is the system we are working with.<br>
That’s<br>
>> a discussion we can have at a later time. For now, we’re stuck<br>
with it.”<br>
>> - insinuating it is not fair. I was quite bothered to have a Dem in a<br>
>> progressive city insinuate that first past the post is more fair. It<br>
>> also felt divisive. If Leno wins, will her supporters feel that<br>
>> democracy prevailed, or that the election was stolen? She also<br>
presents<br>
>> herself as a minority candidate and it is my understanding that RCV<br>
>> gives minority candidates better chances and causes all<br>
candidates to be<br>
>> more likely to campaign to minority communities. Am I mistaken? Are<br>
>> there any legitimate arguments that FPTP can be more fair? Thoughts?<br>
>><br>
>> Regards,<br>
>> —Chris<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ----<br>
>> Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for<br>
list info<br>
>><br>
> ----<br>
> Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for<br>
list info<br>
><br>
<br>
--<br>
<br>
r b-j <a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br></div></div>
<mailto:<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">rbj@audioimagination.<wbr>com</a>><span><br>
<br>
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for<br>
list info<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
--<br></span>
*Greg Dennis, Ph.D. :: Policy Director*<br>
Voter Choice Massachusetts<br>
<br>
e :: <a href="mailto:greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:greg.dennis@voterchoicema.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">greg.dennis@<wbr>voterchoicema.org</a>><br>
p :: 617.863.0746 <tel:617.863.0746><br>
w :: <a href="http://voterchoicema.org" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">voterchoicema.org</a> <<a href="http://voterchoicema.org/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://voterchoicema.org/</a>><br>
<br>
:: Follow us on Facebook<br>
<<a href="https://www.facebook.com/voterchoicema" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.facebook.com/<wbr>voterchoicema</a>> and Twitter<br>
<<a href="https://twitter.com/voterchoicema" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://twitter.com/<wbr>voterchoicema</a>> ::<span><br>
<br>
<br>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
<br>
</span></blockquote><div class="m_6667562183132606041m_3946236845008707540m_8994414804253371469HOEnZb"><div class="m_6667562183132606041m_3946236845008707540m_8994414804253371469h5">
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info</div></div></blockquote></div>
</div></div></div></div></div>
<br>----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="http://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div></div></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</body></html>