<div dir="auto">This burial ploy will backfire if every elimination is completed by "take down", i.e. taking down with it all of the candidates defeated by it.<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But I see your point ... a simple, proposable, burial resistant Condorcet efficient method is not that easy to find.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The "with take down" trick makes any elimination method burial resistant ... including Sequential Pairwise Elimination ... a method that has been routinely used for ages in deliberative assemblies (and long recommended by Robert's Rules) but not in large public elections because the repeated queries aspect makes it cumbersome.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Ironically, the same technology that makes "instant" Hare runoff possible makes SPE based on the same ballots even more efficient (because of the summability of the pairwise defeat matrix).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">How many people understand this?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The reliability of Hare because of long experience is no greater than that of SPE ... it's just that nobody knows that it's now available for public political elections ... not only parliaments, etc.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">SPE (with take down):</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">While more than one candidate remains, eliminate the pairwise loser between the two least favorable agenda items ... along with every item defeated by it.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Again it should be prefaced by words to the effect... "In the very rare case that every candidate suffers a pairwise defeat it is even much more rare that the resulting preference cycle is due to an innocent lack of judgment. Methods that make that presumption of innocence inevitably fall into the trap of the manipulators that caused the artificial cycle. The following version of SPE will make their unilateral burial ploy backfire onthe manipulators by electing their least favorite member of the artificial cycle that they created by their unilateral burial of the sincere CW" ... or something to that effect.</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Sep 23, 2023, 5:49 PM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Benjamin is vulnerable to an offensive strategy:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Say my faction is fairly sure that our favorite will have a higher top-count than the CW. So we look around for a candidate against whom we probably have a pairwise win. We use ord-reversal to make him pair-beat the CW. Now we have a circular tie in which Benjamin will eliminate, before ours, the candidate who pair-beats ours.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 14:52 Forest Simmons <<a href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">forest.simmons21@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto"></div><div dir="auto"><div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Sep 23, 2023, 11:19 AM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</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">
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Hi Rob—<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">You wrote:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Oh Michael...where do I begin? Your apparent move to
the dark side makes me sad. I realize that this intro may sound
condescending, but I truly don't mean it that way. I deeply respect your
opinion. YOU were the one who taught me about "center squeeze" in
1995 or so, and made me rethink AV/PV/IRV/RCV (or whatever the name of the week
is). <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Yes, earlier I was quite critical of RCV (called IRV in
those days, before San Francisco insisted on RCV, because “instant” was
misleading people to expect an instantaneous count).<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I was wrong.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">You know that often the relative merits, advantages &
disadvantages of single-winner methods aren’t what they at first seem. Never be
prematurely sure that someone is wrong about such matters.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">But I would like to remind you that I also continue to say
that Condorcet, in its best versions, is my favorite, because, always electing
the CW, it best gets rid of the lesser-of-2-evils problem (LO2E) for any &
every<span> </span>kind of voter, thereby
accommodating even the most timid LO2E giveaway voter.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">As I said, RCV only works & has merit if the voters
aren’t timid overcomromising LO2E giveaway voters.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I don’t deny that Condorcet-failure is a disadvantage, but,
with a good electorate, it doesn’t matter. I used to say that Approval’s
equal-givaway, amounting to an abstention between Favorite & Lesser-Evil,
is better than RCV’s favorite-burial…but not if you have an electorate that won’t
do the burial !!!<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Approval & STAR encourage Mr. Timid to do giveaway. RCV
encourages everyone to be frank, honest, ambitious, hopeful !!!<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…because, as I said, that won’t be a problem, because an
electorate that has enacted RCV didn’t do so because they want & intend to
vote a hold-you-nose lesser-evil over their favorite (They can & do do that
now, in Plurality). If they enact RCV it’s because they want & intend to
sincerely rank the candidates, expressing & fully-supporting their
favorite.<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…& so THEY WILL DO SO !!!<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">So don’t worry about LO2E strategy in RCV voting.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Anti-RCVists often say that RCV doesn’t really honor
majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">But, as I’ve been saying, though RCV doesn’t meet the
Condorcet Criterion, it meets the Mutual-Majority Criterion (MMC).<span> </span>Let me state an improved & expanded
definition of MMC:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">MMC:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">If there are 1 or more sets of candidates such that a
majority of the voters prefer the candidates of that set to everyone outside
the set, then the winner should come from such a set.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(Then it goes without saying that, when there’s a
Mutual-Majority (defined below) the winner will come from that
Mutual-Majority.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span> </span>[end of MMC
definition]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">A majority who all prefer some set of candidates to everyone
outside that set, I call an Agreeing-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">A majority who all prefer *the same* set of candidates to
everyone outside that set, I call a <span> </span>Mutual-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(Arguably a weaker definition of a Mutual-Majority would do:
A majority who all prefer all of their favorites to everyone outside the set of
all their favorites.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">When there are 1 or more Agreeing-Majorities, RCV always
elects the candidate of the largest faction of<span>
</span>an Agreeing-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">i.e. under those conditions, RCV always elects the favorite
of an Agreeing-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">RCV always elects the candidate of the largest faction of
the Mutual-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">i.e. RCV always elects the favorite of the Mutual-Majority.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">That candidate isn’t an unpopular extremist, but instead has
strong genuine majority coalition support, as defined above.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I just think you're incorrect about FairVote.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I didn’t say anything about FairVote.<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Whether you like FairVote or not, that has no bearing on the
merits of RCV.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">FairVote, from the start, has insisted on offering the
traditional RCV.<span> </span>We should respect that
choice. RCV has about a century of precedent in Australia & Ireland.
Proposing a traditional method with long precedent is a valid practical choice,
& one that we should respect.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…& that proposal has been enormously successful, &
is sweeping this country. Maybe its century of traditional precedent has
something to do with its success.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">When RCV was<span>
</span>initially being adopted, of course there were no computers, & so Condorcet’s
complete pairwise-count would be infeasible in a large election. Sure, the
Sequential-Pairwise (SP) pairwise-count only needs about twice as much
vote-counting as RCV.<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(Approval, Score, STAR & RCV all need roughly the same
amount of vote-counting (they all vary greatly), & SP needs about twice as
much.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Maybe people didn’t want twice as much vote-counting. Or
maybe they were afraid that SP would be rejected because of its Pareto
violation (which I consider irrelevant, just like MinMax’s Condorcet-Loser
violation). <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Then there’s Coombs, which I guess would have about the same
amount of vote-counting as RCV. But maybe they didn’t like Coombs because things
could get ridiculous, like when I nominate Dracula in the primary, so that we
can bury the Democrat under Dracula. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…but of course there are worse things than ridiculous.<span> </span>Maybe we haven’t been fair to Coombs.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">As I said, I prefer Condorcet, in its best versions, but
it’s RCV that has the activist movement, big well-funded national organization,
lobbyists, experienced & active campaign-managers, & big successes all
around this country.<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…with (I’ve read) on the order of 60 municipalities & 2
states having adopted RCV.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">If RCV, & not Condorcet, is succeeding, we Condorcetists
have nothing to complain about. When the RCVists were doing the work, we
weren’t out there enacting anything.<span> </span>Don’t
blame the RCVists for that..<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">We should acknowledge, commend & appreciate what the RCV
organization has accomplished.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">RCV is already poorly understood. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">RCV is enormously popular with progressives &
progressive organizations & parties, such as the GPUSA, the U.S.
Greens.<span> </span>…because they understand that
rank-balloting will allow them to express all of their preferences among the
candidates.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…& because they’ve been correctly informed that RCV has
genuine strong majority properties, when it coalesces the Mutual-Majority.<span> </span>..even if they haven’t heard about the
details of those properties.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">As for RCV’s definition, RCV can be defined very briefly, in
one sentence:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Repeatedly eliminate the candidate who tops fewest rankings,
till someone tops most of them.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[end of brief RCV definition]</p></div></blockquote></div></div></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto">Brief definition of Benham:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Repeatedly eliminate the candidate who tops the fewest rankings until someone tops most of them in every head-head matchup (between it and any other uneliminated candidate).</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">fws</div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"></blockquote></div></div></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">When I moved to San Francisco in 2011, I expected to
grudgingly like voting in RCV elections, and I expected to enjoy ranking my
choices What I found instead was that very few people here understand
how votes are counted<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">They would if they heard RCV’s brief definition.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">, and many folks in my lefty political tribe here take great
pride in their ignorance of math and the inner workings of their electoral
system, trusting that the powers-that-be will count things correctly.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…& they’re right, when the method is RCV.<span> </span>(…& likewise would be, with a good
Condorcet version too.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">As "exhibit A", I will point to the recent clown
show in Alameda County (i.e. just a few miles east of me, on the other side of
a puddle known as the "San Francisco Bay"):<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""><a href="https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Alameda-County-admits-tallying-error-in-17682520.php" style="color:blue;text-decoration:underline" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Alameda-County-admits-tallying-error-in-17682520.php</a><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif""> It would seem that they had been counting RCV
elections wrong for DECADES, and only noticed the problem in 2022.
Simplicity and precinct summability matters.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">RCV’s brief definition is simple. RCV is simple, natural
& obvious.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">There’s a lot of mis-statement about “Precinct-Summability”,
& questionable-ness about what “Precinct Summability” is supposed to mean..<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Plurality, Approval & Score:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Candidates’ vote totals are summed in each precinct &
sent to a central count-place, where there’s a central tabulation.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">STAR:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Same, at first. Then the central counting place determines
the two top scorers, & then presumably sends that information to the
precincts, which still have the rankings, & the precincts each total the pairwise
votes for each of the finalists over the other, & they all send that back
to the central location, where the results are summed & the final winner
reported.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Condorcet:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Each precinct counts the preference votes for A over B,
& for B over A, for each of the N(N-1)/2 pairs {A,B}.<span> </span>…& those totals are sent in to the
central location, where the winner is determined according to the rules of
whatever Condorcet version is being used.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">RCV:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Each precinct counts the top-count score of each candidate,
& sends that in to the central location.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The central location totals that count for each candidate,
to determine which has lowest top-score, & sends that information back to
the precincts. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Each precinct eliminates that candidate from its rankings,
& repeats the first line above.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Repeat till the central location finds that one candidate
tops most of the rankings.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">---<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Notice something similar about those?<span> </span>Every one of those procedures requires counts
at the precincts, & also at the central location, & communication
between the two.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">How is RCV different?<span>
</span>It does such a procedure a number of times. That’s it. That’s the
difference.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">So it’s questionable regarding what is this “Precinct
Summability” that Plurailty, Approval, Score, STAR & Condorcet all have,
but RCV allegedly doesn’t have.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">The same security measures, precautions & audits can be
done with RCV as with any of the other methods whose procedures are described
above.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Strategy-evaluation for Condorcet-complying pairwise-count
methods has proven to be complicated & more difficult than one would
expect.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">This I will agree with. That is why I've hopped on the
approval voting bandwagon for single-winner reform.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">[/quote]<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">That’s a bit hasty. Undeniably some of the pairwise-count
Condorcet-compliant methods thwart &/or deter offensive strategy so well
that it won’t be a problem, & the election of the sincere-CW will virtually
always be elected.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">There’s the argument that there are so many good Condorcet
versions that choosing between them is prohibitively problematic, preventing
the adoption of any of them.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">No, several of the best versions can be offered to a
proposal-committee, & it can discuss & evaluate them & then choose
a proposal.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…& there are a few obviously simplest proposals, making
the choice a lot less complicated & difficult than antii-Condorcetists
claim:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">MinMax:<span> </span><span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Elect the candidate whose greatest defeat is the least.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(…implying the election of an unbeaten candidate when there
is one ( as there nearly always is) ).<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Condorcet//Approval:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Your ranking is counted as approving everyone you rank. If
no one is pairwise-unbeaten, then elect the most approved candidate.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Majority-Defeat Disquaification//Approval (MDDA):<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Your ranking is counted as approving everyone you rank. Elect
any unbeaten candidate. If there are none, then every majority pairwise-beaten
candidate is disqualified, & the un-disqualified candidate with most
approvals is elected.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(I’ve added a Condorcet-winner electing clause, because I
now feel that Condorcet’s failure-betrayal scenario is so rare &
unpredictable as to be irrelevant to strategy.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Sequential-Pairwise:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Order the candidates in a list such that the ones topping
more rankings are listed below the ones topping fewer rankings.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Find the pairwise-winner among the top 2 candidates in the
ordering. Then find the pairwise winner between that winner & the next
candidate down the list.<span> </span>Condtinue until
you’ve found the winner of the then-current winner & the last candidate in
the list. S/he wins.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">----------<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’d offer those 4 simple pairwise-count versions.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’d also offer Approval, in case the jurisdiction either
couldn’t afford, or didn’t want to spend for, rank-balloting equipment &
software.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’d also offer RCV & STAR, because some
proposal-committee members might prefer them.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">I’d personally propose & justify the choice of a Pairwise-Count,
with RCV as next choice, & of course Approval if rank-balloting is
infeasible or rejected.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">If there were a ranked vote in the proposal committee, of
course my ranking would be:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">1. Some ordering of the above-listed four Pairwise-Count
methods<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">2. RCV<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">3. Approval if ranked-balloting is infeasible or rejected.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">-----<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Yes, I like Approval. Under different conditions, normal
conditions, it would be my suggestion, though STAR would then be okay too.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">But our voting-conditions are anything but normal.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">We always have a sleazy & corrupt POS “lesser”-evil,
& a dramatically-horrifying greater-evil.<span>
</span>(…& some better candidates who, our media insist, are unwinnable, minor,
not-serious, candidates.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">We’re constantly told that the greater evil is the only bad
result, & so we have to support the “lesser-evil” against the greater-evil (…&
against our favorite).<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">Always. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">It’s always this same discouraging, dismal & hopeless
situation.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">That isn’t normal.<span> </span>It
certainly isn’t natural.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">So yes, I’d suggest Approval under normal conditions. But
our highly, bizarrely, abnormal & unnatural conditions require special
methods to deal with the (allegedly) hard choice between genuinely-wanted
outcomes, & odious dismal regrettable & deplorable “lesser” evils.<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">For these conditions, we need something more powerfully-discriminating:
a rank-method, to let everyone vote all their preferences among as many
candidates as they want to.<span> </span>…to elicit
& count genuine favoriteness<span>
</span>immediately. <span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">(…not after several election-cycles, because a lot of harm
can be done in 4 years or 8 years.)<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">It’s like when, in _The Godfather_, Michael says to his
attorney:<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">…<span></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin:0in 0in 10pt;line-height:115%;font-size:11pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"">“No, you’re a peacetime consiglieri, but right now we need a
wartime consiglieri.”<span></span></p>
</div></blockquote></div></div></div><div dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div>
</div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div>