<html><head><meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"></head><body dir="auto"><div></div><div><br></div><div>The "donut hole created by STV" is as you previously say but an obscure "I would suggest" not an established fact as it then appears to be treated. What STV does, Major Frank Britton the former Electoral Reform Society Ballot Services manager said, is to give people what they want. That is by free order of choice in the vote, and equality in a large constituency proportional count.</div><div>The single member system can neither give freedom nor equality, because it is a monopoly on representation.</div><div>There were donut ("doughnut") and other gerrymandered single member costituency contortions, when the Tory party, after 1979, had the boundaries redrawn to increase their majority of seats from about 40 to about 100, while slightly decreasing their minority vote from about 44% to 42%.</div><div>As Joe Rogalay, in Parliament for the People, said of politicians, they are not democrats. He recommended STV be called the Supervote. He also remembered Churchill: I would rather be one-fifth of the Members<span style="-webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0);"> for</span> the whole of Leeds than one Member for a fifth of Leeds.</div><div><br></div><div>Regards,</div><div>Richard Lung. </div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br></div><div><br>On 25 Sep 2023, at 7:00 am, Rob Lanphier <<a href="mailto:roblan@gmail.com">roblan@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br><br></div><div><div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Michael,</div><div><br></div><div>I've been letting this thread go without me, even though my first name is in the title (and presumably doesn't refer to the ED of Fairvote or the CEO of RealNetworks).</div><div><br></div><div>I think I largely agree with Kristofer Munsterhjelm and Forest Simmons in this thread, but admittedly, I've only skimmed the conversation (which...has a lot of words). Earlier this weekend, was inspired to copy over some prose from English Wikipedia to create the following page because of your mention of "L02E":</div><div><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/LO2E" target="_blank">https://electowiki.org/wiki/LO2E</a><br></div><br><div>It would seem that you are deep into the community/tribe of the Greens based on this quote:</div><div>"Greens win all of our non-mass-media polls."</div><div><br></div><div>I don't think the Greens are a mainstream party. They seem to be quite happy being a niche party complaining about how the Democrats are not as pro-socialism and pro-environment as they are. I'm going to guess that the Greens are fighting for fully compostable voting booths right now, and for all of the weapons used by the police and the military to be fully compostable. You know, the important stuff ;-)<br></div><div><br></div><div>I have two sets of recommendations based on whether discussing single-winner reform or mult-winner reform. <br></div><div><ul><li>STV for multi-winner elections -- I like the proportional aspect of STV, and the biggest problems of STV are masked by its strength at selecting multiple candidates proportionally. I suspect that's why the Greens are super into it. The Greens probably look at European democracies and at Australian/New Zealand politics and believe that STV is FANTASTIC. But if one imagines a circular, 2D space where voters' beliefs are scattered throughout it, then I would suggest that STV is great at selecting candidates near the perimeter of the space (proportionally equidistantly around the edge), but does a poor job of picking candidates in the middle of the space.</li><li>Approval, STAR, or a Condorcet-consistent method for single-winner reform -- this is how we plug the donut hole created by STV, and get . We're polarized enough as a country (here in the U.S.) such that it's going to be difficult for people who identify as Democrat/liberal/left-wing are going to have a difficult time trusting anyone who is Republican/conservative/right-wing. I'm cautiously optimistic that Dr. Nicolaus Tideman's Condorcet group will actually start a well-funded organization to match the organizations behind Approval (the Center for Election Science) and STAR (the Equal.Vote Coalition). Very cautiously optimistic. I think that ANYONE starting a new group may underestimate the challenges of doing so. I also generally trust that Dr. Ka-Ping Yee did the analysis correctly in 2005 (<<a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Yee_diagram" target="_blank">https://electowiki.org/wiki/Yee_diagram</a>>), and that Approval and Condorcet-consistent methods perform roughly equivalently.</li></ul></div><div>Having met some folks I like from FairVote (they exist...or at least, they did in 2018 or so), I believe their analysis regarding Condorcet-consistency of past IRV/RCV (i.e. the vast majority have picked the Condorcet winner). However, my fear is that we're going to see more-and-more close RCV elections in the very near future. Most responsible political organizations hire quants to crunch numbers (if they have the money to do it), and/or listen to their quant volunteers who offer compelling data-backed advice. EVERYONE is against corruption (right-wing voters and left-wing voters), and hence why I suspect Tishuara Jones and Cara Spencer both clobbered Lewis Reed in the first St. Louis mayoral primary using approval (<<a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/2021_St._Louis_mayoral_election">https://electowiki.org/wiki/2021_St._Louis_mayoral_election</a>>).</div><div><br></div><div>Lewis Reed was one of the first on the bandwagon to repeal approval voting:</div><a href="https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/effort-underway-to-repeal-approval-voting-in-st-louis-replace-it-with-new-system/article_2c3bad65-1e46-58b6-8b9f-1d7f49d0aaeb.html">https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/effort-underway-to-repeal-approval-voting-in-st-louis-replace-it-with-new-system/article_2c3bad65-1e46-58b6-8b9f-1d7f49d0aaeb.html</a><div><br></div><div>However, I wouldn't be surprised if it was an open secret among St. Louis voters that Lewis Reed was on the take (including Republican, Democratic, Green, and Libertarian voters among others):</div><div><a href="https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/politics/newly-released-photos-show-st-louis-aldermen-lewis-reed-jeffrey-boyd-john-collins-muhammad-taking-thousands-in-bribes/63-e17024ae-eba0-4f6a-af9c-adeaa1d2a04c" target="_blank">https://www.ksdk.com/article/news/politics/newly-released-photos-show-st-louis-aldermen-lewis-reed-jeffrey-boyd-john-collins-muhammad-taking-thousands-in-bribes/63-e17024ae-eba0-4f6a-af9c-adeaa1d2a04c</a></div><div><br></div><div>I have no idea if it was corruption, incompetence, or both when it comes to Bob Kiss in Burlington Vermont in 2009. I'm virtually certain, though, that the numbers show he primarily appealed to his base, and only threw his his opponents (even a substantial number of Democrats) a bone:</div><div><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/2009_Burlington_mayoral_election" target="_blank">https://electowiki.org/wiki/2009_Burlington_mayoral_election</a></div><div><br></div><div>And mind you, this was with all of the advantages of incumbency. If Kiss was any good at his job from 2006 until 2009, he should have won the 2009 election in a landslide. The fact that he won in 2006 (and was presumably Condorcet winner in that election), and then wasn't able to pull together THE SAME VOTERS in 2009 who ranked him first place in 2006 just goes to show that there was a lot of regret about him. The biggest problem in this election was that many Republican voters ranked Montroll (a Democrat), Dan Smith (an independent), and even Jason Simpson (a Green) higher than Kiss. But because of the way the rules worked, their preferences with respect to all of the candidates other than Kiss were ignored BECAUSE Republican Kurt Wright made it to the last round. They would have gotten one of their compromise candidates (e.g. Andy Montroll) if Kiss had not been as popular.</div><div><br></div><div>I've thought about that election a lot, because I've put myself in the shoes of the Wright voters, and just imagine if Kurt Wright was the vaguely-left-of-center Democrat, and Montroll was a vaguely right-of-center Republican, and Bob Kiss was a far-right extremist who managed to get elected to his first term because of a new election method. I would have been pissed if the same system RE-ELECTED the crazy right-winger, even though Kiss's support CLEARLY eroded since the initial election. But (flipping the electoral spectrum back around) it would seem that Burlington repealed IRV because it didn't do its job (i.e. letting the opposition to the incumbent have some say).<br></div><div><br></div><div>I was recently made aware of a paper published by researchers at Yale that suggests that RCV makes polarization and extremism even more likely:</div><div><a href="https://isps.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/di-pb-2-3-23-v3.pdf" target="_blank">https://isps.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/di-pb-2-3-23-v3.pdf</a></div><br><div>I haven't read the paper yet, and I could be summarizing it incorrectly, but it matches my intuition about RCV. We discussed the paper quite a bit at Sass's weekly Open Democracy Discussion a week or two ago:</div><div><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Sass_Open_Democracy_Discussion" target="_blank">https://electowiki.org/wiki/Sass_Open_Democracy_Discussion</a></div><div><br></div><div>I'll probably be attending again this coming Tuesday as I often do. All y'all are welcome to join, and if you join, you can learn more about it from some of the people who likely have read it (or you might learn about other research).<br></div><div><br></div><div>Rob<br></div><div><br></div>On Sat, Sep 23, 2023 at 11:19 AM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);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]<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" 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>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</div><div><span>----</span><br><span>Election-Methods mailing list - see <a href="https://electorama.com/em">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info</span><br></div></body></html>