<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>An Australian recently said that only in the lower house
elections using Alternative Vote are all the candidates to be
preferenced. But this does mean that you may have to elect your
direct opponent. I think it was Bob Ritchie who (rightly) objected
to this. An official government video over-looked this travesty
merely pointing to those poor bastards in the UK and USA who only
have an x marks the spot vote (a bullet vote). <br>
</p>
<p>Some electoral experts have not taken kindly to my pointing out
that my invention of Binomial STV prevents the Australian travesty
of electoral justice, because last preferences count against. as
much as first preferences count for, a candidate.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Richard Lung.</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 30/08/2023 02:41, Forest Simmons
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:CANUDvfqCwweuP8vDxXk=pLV5v8wqSOLhNTSOjBLAeFUtanVFYQ@mail.gmail.com">
<div dir="auto">
<div><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Aug 29, 2023,
11:32 AM Colin Champion <<a
href="mailto:colin.champion@routemaster.app"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">colin.champion@routemaster.app</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div> Asking what's wrong with bullet voting is equivalent
to asking what's wrong with FPTP.</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Not so. What's wrong with FPTP is that it ONLY
allows bullet voting. Big difference!</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Allowing bullet voting is not the same as
requiring it. Even IRV allows bullet voting ... as it should.
Nothing wrong with it. If lots of people want to bullet vote,
go ahead and try to persuade them otherwise ... if you know
somebody worthy of their vote ... but not to just vote for the
sake of voting ... vote for candidates that inspire you by
their honesty and wisdom ... not by their refurbished
recycled slogans or lame claims to lesser evilism.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">In Australia truncation is not permitted. Ask
Chris Benham where that leads!</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div> The answer is not that it subverts the system, but
that it withholds information the system would use to
good effect. The whole of ranked voting theory is based
on exploiting the information which bullet-voters
withhold. <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div> I think Chris's summary of how his system might
work is fair. Supporters of minor parties give their
first preferences accordingly, and compromise with a
mainstream candidate for their second preferences.
Supporters of mainstream parties (the majority) bullet
vote. They don't consider the merits of little-known
alternatives because it's too much effort, and because
minor parties get squeezed out by the election method in
any case. This is very much like PR based on plurality
(with a little compromising thrown in), and unlike PR by
STV except insofar as FPTP is its limiting case.<br>
But if this summary is pessimistic, voters might
indeed fill in ranked preference ballots to a reasonable
depth. In this case, it seems to me that they're being
put to unconscionable lengths for what is only a
primary, and they have no way of knowing where to stop.<br>
Such criticisms are futile unless it's possible to do
better; but I had hoped that my own method was better,
in that it achieved roughly the benefits of voting to
depth four at roughly the cost of voting to depth one. <br>
CJC<br>
<br>
<div>On 28/08/2023 21:09, C.Benham wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<p>Forest,<br>
<br>
Why not? If that's what they want to do I can't
see any problem.<br>
<br>
Given that we have LNHarm no voter has any
particular incentive to bullet vote,<br>
and only those voters who are confidant that their
favourite can make the IRV last <br>
N (or only care about getting their favourite
elected) will have incentive to not bother <br>
indicating any lower preferences.<br>
<br>
Some of the voters will be concerned that their
favourite won't squeeze in to the <br>
IRV last N, so they'll give one or two lower
preferences so that their single vote<br>
can be transferred. This will likely include some
who wouldn't bother doing that if<br>
they weren't honouring preference-swap deals.<br>
<br>
Chris B.<br>
<br>
</p>
<div>On 29/08/2023 3:18 am, Forest Simmons wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div dir="auto">Well, that wouldn't work so well if
everybody bullet voted.
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Mon, Aug 28,
2023, 10:24 AM Forest Simmons <<a
href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com"
target="_blank" rel="noreferrer"
moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">forest.simmons21@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="auto">
<div>For practical purposes, this appeals to
me the most so far.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">But the question remains about
how to determine the number N.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Why not just use the number
ranked (or approved, as the case may be) on
the average primary ballot? </div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun,
Aug 27, 2023, 12:42 PM C.Benham <<a
href="mailto:cbenham@adam.com.au"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer"
target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">cbenham@adam.com.au</a>>
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<p><br>
I am strongly of the view that the
best practical way to narrow down
the field of candidates in one big
open primary <br>
to N candidates should be to just
use strict ranking ballots with
voters able to rank as many or as
few candidates as they like,<br>
and just select the IRV (aka STV)
last N candidatesI</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
<div dir="auto">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<p> <br>
I worry that if the use of approval
ballots for this purpose is
promoted, the powers-that-be won't
be interested in anything<br>
more complicated than "just select
the N most approved candidates"
and (if the election is for an
important powerful office)<br>
we will be left with N corporatist
clones.<br>
<br>
In say the US presidential election,
there is (or can be) quite a bit of
time and campaigning between the
primary election and<br>
the main general election, so I
don't think it matters much if
candidates without much "approval"
in the primary make it on to<br>
the ballot for the final general
election.<br>
<br>
Chris Benham<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"><b>Forest
Simmons</b><span><span> </span></span><a
href="mailto:election-methods%40lists.electorama.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BEM%5D%20Condorcet%20meeting&In-Reply-To=%3CCANUDvfr_qEUF%3DTUVz%3DNP-rt5OkgtkV7VCoOHHeZvmxCwW90vag%40mail.gmail.com%3E"
title="[EM] Condorcet meeting"
rel="noreferrer noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true">forest.simmons21
at gmail.com</a><br>
<i>Sat Aug 26 15:03:20 PDT 2023</i><span></span>
<ul>
<li><br>
</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<pre>I
The choice of n should be flexible enough that if two candidates both had
more than 70 percent approval, and nobody else got more than 49 percent,
then n should be only two.
Perhaps every finalist should have at least 71 percent (about root .5) of
the approval of the candidate with the most approval opposition to the max
approval candidate.
That 71 percent parameter is open to adjustment .
The idea is that we should admit into the final stage anybody with almost
as much approval as Chris Benham's max approval opposition challenger.
fws
</pre>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<pre>----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer" moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a
href="https://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer
noreferrer" target="_blank" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">https://electorama.com/em</a>
for list info<br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></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>