<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/22/2019 9:34 AM, Chris Benham
wrote:</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">
<blockquote type="cite">It still boggles my mind that anyone would
think it appropriate to not allow voters to strictly rank<br>
as many candidates as they wish.<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">An explanation is in order for list
members outside the United States. Essentially all ballots here
are processed using optical scan and/or touchscreen voting
machines. Limitations on the number of candidates the voter can
rank are the direct result of the antiquated voting machines still
in use. Accepting these limitations has been a necessary price of
getting any ranked ballot method adopted anywhere in the U.S. No
one thinks they are a good idea, except some opponents of reform
who argue for a limited number of rankings as a kind of rear-guard
resistance to the reform itself.<br>
</div>
<p>The voting machine situation is improving, but is still not
perfect. Current systems from the three main vendors can
accommodate about 20, 10 and 6 rankings respectively. Six will
become 10 as soon as that vendor's software can print and scan
landscape ballots.</p>
<p>Practical reformers take the understandable position that the
perfect should not be allowed to be the enemy of the good.</p>
<p>--Bob Richard<br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 5/22/2019 9:34 AM, Chris Benham
wrote:</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:d6592eaf-63be-7230-129e-7a3abd7b084d@yahoo.com.au">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<p><br>
Re:<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"> The problem we have had in SF, Berkeley
and Oakland is that each<br>
>> voter can only select three candidates, and the number
of exhausted<br>
>> ballots exceeded the winning margin in at least several
elections.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > yes, that's a known problem with **any** RCV if
the number of<br>
>> candidates on the ballotexceeds the number of ranking
levels.?? you<br>
>> need more ranking levels than 3 and you need stronger
(or stricter)<br>
>> ballot access requirements so that fewer candidates get
on the ballot<br>
>> and only those that are plausible winners.?? i think 5
levels is<br>
>> enough, and the number of signatures on apetition
needed to get on the<br>
>> ballot can be adjusted by law in response to the usual
number of<br>
>> candidates that make it onto the ballot.?? if there are
consistently<br>
>> more names than ranking levels, the legislative body
has the<br>
>> information and the authority necessary to increase the
number<br>
>> ofrequired signatures to have candidate access to the
ballot.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> >> Most clearly in the Kaplan/Quan/Perata mayor's
contest (Oakland''s<br>
>> 1st IRV election)?? There were also six "minor"
candidates.?? Kaplan<br>
>> was?? almost surely the most preferred, but Quan gamed
the system by<br>
>> mortgaging her house and spending a lot asking casual
voters to"make<br>
>> me 2nd.?? The winning margin over Kaplan was very
narrow but the number<br>
>> of exhausted ballots was very large because most of the
minor<br>
>> candidates were black while none of the big three
were.???? A lot of<br>
>> people blamed the IRV system for electing Quan, who was<br>
>> basicallyincompetent, but there has been no serious
attempt to repeal IRV.</blockquote>
<br>
It still boggles my mind that anyone would think it appropriate to
not allow voters to strictly rank<br>
as many candidates as they wish.<br>
<br>
Here in Australia we just had a Federal election. Voting is
compulsory and for the single-member districts<br>
of the House of Representatives voters must strictly rank all the
candidates by writing numbers in boxes <br>
on paper ballots. If they fail to do that their vote is classified
as "informal" and?? has no effect on the result.<br>
<br>
The average number of candidates per single-member district?? was
7.?? I'm having trouble finding out the maximum<br>
number but at least one had 13.?? The total "informal vote" was
5.49%.<br>
<br>
(BTW, I am also strongly of the view that voters should be allowed
to rank as <b>few</b> candidates as they wish.)<br>
<br>
There are no petitions to gain ballot access. Instead you just put
up a cash deposit of?? A$2000 and it is returned to<br>
you if you are elected or get at least 4% of?? the
first-preference vote.<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/05/2019 5:42 am, robert
bristow-johnson wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:a55b999cb943e106b7db7e7239394399.squirrel@webmail04.register.com">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=UTF-8">
<p><br>
<br>
---------------------------- Original Message
----------------------------<br>
Subject: Re: [EM] re Burlington<br>
From: "Richard Lung" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:voting@ukscientists.com" moz-do-not-send="true"><voting@ukscientists.com></a><br>
Date: Mon, May 20, 2019 11:52 am<br>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:election-methods@electorama.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">election-methods@electorama.com</a><br>
Cc: "Sennet Williams" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:sennetwilliams@yahoo.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sennetwilliams@yahoo.com></a><br>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
<br>
> "But it is only Condorcet that elects the candidate that
is explicitly<br>
> preferred by voters over every other candidate."<br>
><br>
> I wonder tho, whether that satisfies the requiremant for
one candidate<br>
> (of their number) to be preferred over a whole range of
candidates?<br>
></p>
<p>i am not sure exactly what you mean, here, Richard.</p>
<p>if there are more than two candidates, while it might be
possible for a single candidate to be preferred over the union
of all the other candidates, that this single candidate has a
*majority* of the vote, more first-choice votes than the sum
of first-choice votes of all other candidates, while it may
happen (and if it does happen, that single candidate must
surely be elected given **any** deterministic voting system),
but?? i don't expect in a 3-way or 4-way race (or more) for
that any candidate will satisfy that criterion.</p>
<p>is that what you're asking about?</p>
<p>but the Condorcet criterion simply proposes that if more
voters mark their ballots preferring Candidate A to Candidate
B than the number of voters marking their ballots to the
contrary, then Candidate B is not elected.</p>
<p>i like to compare it to a mathematical proof by
contradiction: If a Condorcet Winner exists and your election
method does not elect the CW, then who did you elect??? You
elected someone when more voters explicitly marked their
ballots that they preferred some other **specific**
candidate.?? How can that be an expression of the will of the
electorate??? That's the problem with IRV or Borda or Bucklin
(or some other RCV that someone cooks up).?? Most of the time
it may elect the CW.?? Then great!?? No one is complaining.??
But when it doesn't, how possibly can the winner claim to have
the democratic support of the electorate (even though we don't
demand a majority of first-choice votes, since that demand is
unrealistic in a 3-way or 4-way race) when the voters
explicitly say "Give us this other candidate that we like
better!" ??</p>
<p>it's sorta like this stupid Electoral College thing we have
in the U.S.?? if the Electoral College elects the same
candidate as the Popular Vote does, we say that the E.C. does
a pretty good job.?? but when it *doesn't* elect the winner of
the popular vote, it **never** brings legitimacy to the
elected president and vice-president.</p>
<p>L8r,</p>
<p>r b-j</p>
<p><br>
><br>
> On 19/05/2019 01:30, robert bristow-johnson wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> okay, Sennet, I am posting this to the EM mailing
list.<br>
>><br>
>> ---------------------------- Original Message
----------------------------<br>
>> Subject: Re: re Burlington<br>
>><br>
From: "Sennet Williams" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:sennetwilliams@yahoo.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sennetwilliams@yahoo.com></a><br>
>> Date: Sat, May 18, 2019 12:50 pm<br>
>> To: "robert bristow-johnson" <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><rbj@audioimagination.com></a><br>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>><br>
>> > yes, I meant to put that in the email.?? you are
free to post it to<br>
>> the list.<br>
>> > As I probably typed before,?? the problem with
Condorcet is that it<br>
>> would be "practically" impossible to count by hand.<br>
>><br>
>> No, Sennet, it isn't.?? It's straight forward, but
laborious. If doing<br>
>> this by hand, you would need a team of 4 (2 callers
and 2 counters)<br>
>> for each pair combination of candidates.?? If you had
2 candidates,<br>
>> that's one pair (and it's just like FPTP)..?? If you
had 3 candidates,<br>
>> it's 3 pairs.?? If you had 4 candidates, it's 6
pairs.?? If you had 5<br>
>> candidates, it's 10 pairs.?? The counting could be
done simultaneously<br>
>> if you had sufficient people or serially, in turn, if
you don't have<br>
>> more enough for simultaneous counting.?? all ballots
would be handled<br>
>> by each counting team once.?? and it is precinct
summable so the burden<br>
>> can be distributed to many precinct locations.??
unlike IRV, the<br>
>> counting need not be done at a single central
location.<br>
>><br>
>> but for a lot of candidates, like a dozen, IRV would
be faster to do<br>
>> by hand, but still practical.<br>
>><br>
>> >?? In real elections, IRV, and Condorcet will
have the same results:??<br>
>> The winning candidate will be the one who has the
broadest preferred<br>
>> support.<br>
>><br>
>> No, Sennet, that is decidedly false.?? This is why i
asked you if you<br>
>> really "understand what the difference is between IRV
and Condorcet?"??<br>
>> When you make claims like that, it makes me wonder.??
It's simply a<br>
>> demonstrably false assertion.<br>
>><br>
>> The Burlington mayoral election in 2009 was a "real
election". Someone<br>
>> **really** got elected to office in that election.<br>
>><br>
>> And IRV and Condorcet would have clearly gotten
different results in<br>
>> that real election.?? The IRV elected Bob Kiss.?? And
Condorcet would<br>
>> have elected Andy Montroll.?? (And plurality of
first-choice votes<br>
>> would have elected Kurt Wright.)?? But it is only
Condorcet that elects<br>
>> the candidate that is explicitly preferred by voters
over every other<br>
>> candidate.<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Friday, May 17, 2019, 11:40:35 AM PDT, robert
bristow-johnson<br>
>> <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><rbj@audioimagination.com></a>
wrote:<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > hi Sennet,<br>
>> ><br>
>> > can we post this to the list??? i didn't wanna
do that without your<br>
>> consent.?? it's just that maybe we can get someone
else besides the two<br>
>> of us to pipe in on the conversation.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > ---------------------------- Original Message<br>
>> ----------------------------<br>
>> > Subject: re Burlington<br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
From: "Sennet Williams" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:sennetwilliams@yahoo.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><sennetwilliams@yahoo.com></a><br>
>> > Date: Thu, May 16, 2019 8:54 pm<br>
>> > To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">"rbj@audioimagination.com"</a> <a
class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true"><rbj@audioimagination.com></a><br>
>> ><br>
>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
>> ><br>
>> >> well, I have no idea what IRV system
Burlington used.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > it's the same IRV as in every other governmental
RCV election except<br>
>> we had 5 ranking levels and 5 candidates.?? so no one
was<br>
>> "disenfranchised".?? you could have ranked the
candidates in opposite<br>
>> order of their expost facto popularity, and you would
still be able to<br>
>> weigh in on the IRV final round that actually selects
the mayor.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > here is an analysis of what went<br>
>> wrong:??<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://rangevoting.org/Burlington.html"
moz-do-not-send="true">https://rangevoting.org/Burlington.html</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > here's<br>
>>
another:??<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://bolson.org/~bolson/2009/20090303_burlington_vt_mayor.html"
moz-do-not-send="true">http://bolson.org/~bolson/2009/20090303_burlington_vt_mayor.html</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > essentially, we had 4 strong candidates going
in.?? 3 were all<br>
>> plausible winners.?? the GOP candidate had the
Plurality, the Prog<br>
>> candidate wonthe IRV, and the Dem candidate was the
pairwise<br>
>> champion.?? the Dem would have beaten **any** other
candidate in the<br>
>> IRV final round had he been able to advance to the
final round.?? that<br>
>> IRV eliminated him in the semi-final round was the
execution of this<br>
>> inherent flaw of IRV.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> >> The problem we have had in SF, Berkeley and
Oakland is that each<br>
>> voter can only select three candidates, and the
number of exhausted<br>
>> ballots exceeded the winning margin in at least
several elections.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > yes, that's a known problem with **any** RCV if
the number of<br>
>> candidates on the ballotexceeds the number of ranking
levels.?? you<br>
>> need more ranking levels than 3 and you need stronger
(or stricter)<br>
>> ballot access requirements so that fewer candidates
get on the ballot<br>
>> and only those that are plausible winners.?? i think
5 levels is<br>
>> enough, and the number of signatures on apetition
needed to get on the<br>
>> ballot can be adjusted by law in response to the
usual number of<br>
>> candidates that make it onto the ballot.?? if there
are consistently<br>
>> more names than ranking levels, the legislative body
has the<br>
>> information and the authority necessary to increase
the number<br>
>> ofrequired signatures to have candidate access to the
ballot.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> >> Most clearly in the Kaplan/Quan/Perata
mayor's contest (Oakland''s<br>
>> 1st IRV election)?? There were also six "minor"
candidates.?? Kaplan<br>
>> was?? almost surely the most preferred, but Quan
gamed the system by<br>
>> mortgaging her house and spending a lot asking casual
voters to"make<br>
>> me 2nd.?? The winning margin over Kaplan was very
narrow but the number<br>
>> of exhausted ballots was very large because most of
the minor<br>
>> candidates were black while none of the big three
were.???? A lot of<br>
>> people blamed the IRV system for electing Quan, who
was<br>
>> basicallyincompetent, but there has been no serious
attempt to repeal IRV.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > Ranked-Choice Voting will not stop bad
politicians that are good<br>
>> salespersons from winning office.?? But it is
intended to stop spoiler<br>
>> candidates from preventing the candidate with the
actual popular<br>
>> supportfrom winning.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> >> When CA gets statewide IRV, we would
presumably Maine's system and<br>
>> all counties will be given new equipment so all
candidates can be ranked.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > In Burlington we didn't need new equipment.??
just new software.?? the<br>
>> optical-scan machines were the same machines, but
they had to<br>
>> beprogrammed slightly differently.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Sennet, do you understand what the difference is
between IRV and<br>
>> Condorcet??? What it is that we on the list bitch
about regarding IRV.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Our issue is not that we don't like RCV, we
**want** Ranked-Choice<br>
>> Voting, we just want the rules reformed so thatthe
pairwise champion<br>
>> is always elected.?? IRV will do that *most* of the
time, but it does<br>
>> not always do that.?? and like the Electoral College,
when IRV fails to<br>
>> elect who we all know should have been elected, it
never brings<br>
>> legitimacy to the election.?? failure to elect the
pairwisechampion<br>
>> will only harm voting system reform.<br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> ><br>
>> > --<br>
>> ><br>
>> > r b-j?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ?? ??<a
class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com"
moz-do-not-send="true">rbj@audioimagination.com</a><br>
>> ><br>
>> > "Imagination is more important than knowledge."<br>
>> ></p>
<p>??</p>
<p>??</p>
<p>??</p>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://electorama.com/em" moz-do-not-send="true">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
<div id="DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2"><br>
<table style="border-top: 1px solid #D3D4DE;">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="width: 55px; padding-top: 13px;"><a
href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"><img
src="https://ipmcdn.avast.com/images/icons/icon-envelope-tick-green-avg-v1.png"
alt="" style="width: 46px; height: 29px;"
moz-do-not-send="true" width="46" height="29"></a></td>
<td style="width: 470px; padding-top: 12px; color:
#41424e; font-size: 13px; font-family: Arial, Helvetica,
sans-serif; line-height: 18px;">Virus-free. <a
href="http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient"
target="_blank" style="color: #4453ea;"
moz-do-not-send="true">www.avg.com</a> </td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<a href="#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2" width="1"
height="1" moz-do-not-send="true"> </a></div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://electorama.com/em">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>