<div dir="ltr"><div>Obviously I can't prove it, but look how incomparably much easier Approval is to describe, propose & implement at zero cost.<br></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 3:12 AM Michael Garman <<a href="mailto:michael.garman@rankthevote.us">michael.garman@rankthevote.us</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">>> <span style="font-family:"times new roman",serif;word-spacing:1px;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(49,49,49);color:rgb(49,49,49)">If Approval had been the proposal over that period, it would be in use in all 50 states by now.</span><br><br>I find it incredibly hard to believe that there wouldn’t be a partisan backlash the first time approval cost one or the other — or both — the election. The major parties famously love giving third parties a fair shot. Not denying that it’s a fine system that ought to be used in more places than it currently is, but this claim is absurd. <br clear="all"><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><p dir="ltr" style="line-height:1.38;margin-top:0pt;margin-bottom:0pt;color:rgb(34,34,34)"><span>On Fri, Mar 22, 2024 at 8:07 AM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><br></p></div></div></div></div><div><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 style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Part 3:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Part 2 didn’t send. I wrote it on my phone, & it failed to send.
Hopefully a copy will be returned to me, so that I can try again to send it.
But I’m writing this Part 3 on the desk-computer, so that I can save it in
Word, so that, whatever happens with unsuccessful sending, I’ll have it to
resend.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Approval-Advantages continued:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Let’s talk about enactment:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The incomparably easier implementation makes Approval much more enactable.
Let me say more about easy implantation: Approval can be implemented with no
new balloting-equipment, & also without even any software-modifications.
Here’s a way:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">The existing Plurality-count software is designed for collecting<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">  </span>a single vote in a race. So tell the
count-program that there are many 2-way races (one for each candidate). The
ballot has a line for each candidate’s name & voting-bubble. But,
alternating with those lines, are blank lines, where the count-program expects
votes for the nonexistent other candidate in the fictitious 2-way race.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">So, when the counting is done, the count-program will report the results for
all those fictitious 2-way races, including 0 for each of the vote-totals for
the nonexistent opponents, & also the vote-totals for each actual
candidate.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">In that way, the existing Plurality count-software will give the totals for
each actual candidate, summed over all the ballots. <span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">So that’s why I said that Approval can be implemented at zero cost. No
software modification needed.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Now, what does FairVote (under various names) have to show for its 35 years
of expensively promoting IRV (under various names)?<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">  </span>Two states & some cities.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">  </span><span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Two states.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Sorry, but I don’t call that success. Sure, if the people of Oregon &
Nevada have been well-enough deceived, there could be two more states this
year. But 4 out of 50 sounds more like failure for a 35-year effort.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If Approval had been the proposal over that period, it would be in use in
all 50 states by now.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Critreria:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Just as an added bonus:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Approval passes several criteria that Condorcet fails:<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">Participation, Consistency, & IIAC (all without loss of Pareto).<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I don’t include FBC, because Condorcet’s FBC-failure that we discussed at EM
a long time ago is so rare as to be strategically-irrelevant.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If burial is a problem, then FBC-failure comes back when we need
favorite-burying drastic defenses to try to protect CW from burial. But the wv
Condorcet-versions are so burial-deterrent, in 2 separate ways (Minimal-Defense
& autodeterrence*), that burial can be ignored when voting.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">*Even without any defensive-truncation, burial’s backfire is 10 times more
likely than its success.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">[Conclusion of this short Part 3]<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">If Part 2 hasn’t been sent yet, & doesn’t automatically get sent,
hopefully a copy will be returned to me, & I’ll then send it along.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">…<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></span></p>

<p style="margin-right:0in;margin-left:0in;font-size:12pt;font-family:"Times New Roman",serif">I have to say that, from now on, anything long will be written in word on
the desktop computer instead of on the phone, for safekeeping of long messages
in case they fail to send & are lost.<span style="font-family:"Times New Roman",serif"></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>
</blockquote></div></div>