<div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">>> <span style="font-family:-apple-system,"helvetica neue";font-size:1rem;word-spacing:1px;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(49,49,49);color:rgb(49,49,49)">Marianne Williamson is a genuine Progressive, & (I hope) in on the ballot in all states.</span><div><br></div></div><div dir="auto">She didn’t qualify for the ballot here in Rhode Island. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">>> <span style="font-family:-apple-system,helveticaneue;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(0,0,0);color:rgb(0,0,0)">What are you unhappy about, regarding Jill Stein</span><br><br>Her stance on Ukraine. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">>> <span style="font-family:-apple-system,helveticaneue;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(0,0,0);color:rgb(0,0,0)">Marianne Williamson</span></div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"><font style="font-family:-apple-system,helveticaneue;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(0,0,0);color:rgb(0,0,0)"><br></font></div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"><font style="font-family:-apple-system,helveticaneue;background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(0,0,0);color:rgb(0,0,0)">Her promotion of questionable — to pick a charitable word — scientific claims. </font><br><br><div class="gmail_quote" dir="auto"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 12:05 AM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com">email9648742@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 13:55 Closed Limelike Curves <<a href="mailto:closed.limelike.curves@gmail.com" target="_blank">closed.limelike.curves@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">As an example, I'd much prefer a situation where Biden had a Democratic opponent listed separately on the ballot that I could rate higher. </div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Marianne Williamson is a genuine Progressive, & (I hope) in on the ballot in all states.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">…& should also be, with whatever voting-system.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Right now, I'm not happy with any of the candidates in the race</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">What are you unhappy about, regarding Jill Stein, Marianne Williamson (candidate for the Democrat-nomination), or the Greens’ platform, or Williamson’s platform?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"> on a simple left-right scale I'm close to Biden, but I'm not exactly enthusiastic about an 82-year old president. </div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But you’re enthusiastic about what Biden has been doing during recent months?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">Though I'm sure as hell not supporting any other candidate in the race...</div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">You sure as hell aren’t supporting a Progressive !!!</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"></blockquote></div></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr">) With STAR, every voter has at least two candidates they consider tolerable.<br></div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><br></div><div dir="ltr"><br></div></div></div></div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"></div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Wed, Apr 10, 2024 at 12:36 PM Michael Ossipoff <<a href="mailto:email9648742@gmail.com" target="_blank">email9648742@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div><br></div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Tue, Apr 9, 2024 at 17:31 Chris Benham <<a href="mailto:cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au" target="_blank">cbenhamau@yahoo.com.au</a>> wrote:</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">[quote]</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Score is Approval with a "I wish to weaken the effect of my
vote for the sake of being more sincere/expressive" box/button.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">[/quote]</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">If that’s how you want to vote in Score, then suit yourself.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">The right use of Score:</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Use only min & max ratings. i.e. Use Score as Approval.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">…with the difference that, when it’s uncertain whether or not a candidate deserves approval, you can give hir partial approval, by an intermediate point-rating.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Nice, sometimes convenient, because, otherwise, the only way to give someone partial approval would be probabilistically.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">But Score loses Approval’s absolute minimalness, & unique unarbitrariness.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Much better to let the voters deal with such things for themselves with the absolutely minimal handtool, than to use some arbitrary & (somewhat or greatly) complicated definition, rule & count. …with the consequent expense & count-fraud vulnerability.</div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div><div lang="x-unicode"><p dir="auto">
So it is strategically equivalent to Approval while being more
complicated and less fair.</p></div></div></blockquote><div dir="auto">More complicated, yes.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I strongly oppose a runoff for Approval, but some jurisdictions might insist on one. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">…likewise Score. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It’s true that it somewhat increases Condorcet-efficiency & Social-Utility (SU), but it brings great strategy-complication, including the loss of FBC compliance.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But STAR is better than Hare because:</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It retains some amount Score’s merit.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It’s much, much simpler than Hare, resulting in much better count-fraud security.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It’s much less expensive to administer & implement than Hare.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It’s much simpler to describe its workings when proposing it.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204)"><div><div lang="x-unicode"><p dir="auto"><br>
<br>
And Approval has a quite good reputation here because it meets
Favorite Betrayal (aka FBC) and compared with FPP the winner<br>
will strongly tend to have higher social utility and be much
more likely a sincere Condorcet winner. Also, and not
unrelatedly, <br>
it has a bias toward centrists that some people think is
wonderful.<br>
<br>
But some people seem to think that adding a Top-Two Runoff
(automated in the case of STAR) to Score (to make STAR) is just<br>
a harmless little gimmick that just makes the method "a bit more
accurate", brings it into compliance with Condorcet Loser<br>
and so must make it more "Condorcet efficient". ("Sky-high"
according to CLC here).<br>
<br>
But actually it makes the method profoundly different and very
bad. It seems to me that the inventors of STAR must have been <br>
motivated by three priorities:<br>
<br>
(1) the method isn't Hare, <br>
<br>
(2) the method, in a purely technical and completely useless
way, apparently meets Mono-raise (aka Monotonicity).<br>
<br>
(3) subject to being saleable to and understood by not-so-deep
thinkers, the method be as bad as possible.<br>
<br>
From the "equal-vote" website: <a href="https://www.equal.vote/" target="_blank">https://www.equal.vote/</a><br>
<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)">Ranked
Choice Voting, where voters rank candidates in order of
preference has been lauded as a solution, but in elections
where the third candidate is actually competitive,<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> </span></span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhO6jfHPFQU&t=169s" style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:bold;font-style:normal;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;vertical-align:baseline;text-decoration:underline;font-size:16px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">vote-splitting
remains a serious issue</a><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)"><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> </span>and
RCV only offers a marginal improvement compared to a primary
and general election with Choose-One Plurality voting.</span></blockquote>
<p></p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)">Luckily,
many voting methods are can effectively prevent
vote-splitting. As it turns out, when voters can weigh in on
each candidate individually, when all ballot data is counted,
and when voters are able to show equal preference,
vote-splitting can be eliminated. All voting methods which do
this pass the</span><span style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:400;font-style:normal;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;vertical-align:baseline;font-size:16px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)"> </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Equal_Vote_Criterion" style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:bold;font-style:normal;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;vertical-align:baseline;text-decoration:underline;font-size:16px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">Equal
Vote Criterion</a><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)">,
including </span><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.starvoting.us/star" style="box-sizing:border-box;margin:0px;padding:0px;border:0px;outline:0px;font-weight:bold;font-style:normal;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;vertical-align:baseline;text-decoration:underline;font-size:16px;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">STAR
Voting</a><span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:16px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(47,47,47)">,...</span></blockquote>
<br>
The "Equal Vote Criterion" is just propaganda nonsense: <a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Equal_Vote_Criterion" target="_blank">https://electowiki.org/wiki/Equal_Vote_Criterion</a><br>
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)">The
Equal Vote Criterion or<span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span></span><a rel="nofollow" href="https://www.equal.vote/theequalvote" style="text-decoration:none;background-image:url("");background-size:0.857em auto;padding-right:1em;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(51,102,204);background-position:100% 50%;background-repeat:no-repeat no-repeat" target="_blank">Equality
Criterion</a><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span>is
a<span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span></span><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Voting_system_criterion" title="Voting system criterion" style="text-decoration:none;background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(51,102,204)" target="_blank">voting
method criterion</a><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span>which
requires that a voting method ensure that every voter may cast
a vote which is as powerful as a vote cast by any other voter.
Voting methods which pass the Equal Vote Criterion do not
exhibit<span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span></span><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Vote-splitting" title="Vote-splitting" style="text-decoration:none;background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(51,102,204)" target="_blank">vote-splitting</a><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)"><span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span>or
the "Spoiler Effect," ensuring that every vote can cast an<span style="font-family:sans-serif"> </span></span><a href="https://electowiki.org/wiki/Equally_Weighted_Vote" title="Equally Weighted Vote" style="text-decoration:none;background-image:none;font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(51,102,204)" target="_blank">equally
weighted vote</a><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)">.</span></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="font-family:sans-serif;font-size:14px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:start;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;float:none;display:inline;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(32,33,34)">Choose-One
Plurality Voting (First Past the Post) and Instant Runoff
Voting (often referred to as Ranked Choice Voting) do not
satisfy the Equal Vote Criterion.</span></blockquote>
<br>
This is just dishonest blather. If anything meets this very vague
and confused "criterion" IRV (aka Hare) certainly does. <br>
<br>
The classic scenario that motivated some people get negative about
Hare (and also methods like Min-Max Margins):<br>
<br>
49 Bush<br>
24 Gore<br>
27 Nader>Gore<br>
<p></p>
<p>Gore>Bush 51-49, Bush>Nader 49-27, Nader>Gore 27-24.<br>
<br>
Hare eliminates Gore and elects Bush, so the Nader voters whose
Gore> Bush preference was strong had incentive to use the
Compromise <br>
strategy and vote Gore>Nader ("betraying" their sincere
favourite). If the method was Approval they could have approved
both Nader and<br>
Gore, preventing the election of Bush without having to vote
their sincere favorite below equal-top.<br>
<br>
But in this type of scenario STAR does no better than Hare. The
Nader voters would have incentive to give Nader zero points.<br>
<br>
"Traditionally" Hare's vulnerability to Push-over strategy has
said to be a result of it's failure of Mono-raise. But STAR is
much more vulnerable<br>
to Push-over.<br>
<br>
Say you are sure that your favourite will make the final two. In
that case then you have incentive to give every candidate that
you are sure your<br>
favourite can beat 4 or 5 stars. If 5 stars then you are
relying on you favourite winning the runoff without your help,
but if 4 stars then you might<br>
fail to get one of the predicted sure-loser turkeys into the
final.<br>
<br>
In a Hare Push-over strategy scenario, the strategists rely on
their favourite winning the runoff against their own votes, i.e.
with their votes supporting<br>
the turkey against their favourite. This makes it much more
risky (more likely to backfire) and difficult to coordinate than
is the case with STAR.<br>
<br>
The equal-vote site has a link to a quite ok video on the
Favorite Betrayal Criterion. I find that weird and misleading,
because STAR badly fails FBC.<br>
<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtKAScORevQ" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtKAScORevQ</a><br>
<br>
From <a href="https://www.starvoting.org/" target="_blank">https://www.starvoting.org/</a><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite">
<h2 style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;font-family:Montserrat,sans-serif;font-weight:700;line-height:1.2;font-size:2.25rem;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(2,106,134)">Why
STAR Voting? </h2>
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;line-height:1.7;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:18px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0)"><span style="box-sizing:border-box;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif">Voting reform is the
keystone. A single cause with the potential to empower us to
be more effective on every other issue we care about. </span></p>
<ul style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;font-size:18px;font-style:normal;font-variant-ligatures:normal;font-variant-caps:normal;font-weight:400;letter-spacing:normal;text-align:left;text-indent:0px;text-transform:none;word-spacing:0px;white-space:normal;background-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(0,0,0)">
<li style="box-sizing:border-box;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;line-height:1.7;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.starvoting.org/strategic_voting" style="box-sizing:border-box;text-decoration:none;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;background-color:transparent;color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">Honesty
is the best strategy. Strategic voting is not
incentivized.</a></p>
</li>
<li style="box-sizing:border-box;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;line-height:1.7;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.starvoting.org/how_to_vote" style="box-sizing:border-box;text-decoration:none;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;background-color:transparent;color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">Even
if your favorite can’t win, your vote helps prevent your
worst case scenario.</a></p>
</li>
<li style="box-sizing:border-box;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif">
<p style="box-sizing:border-box;margin-top:0px;margin-bottom:1rem;line-height:1.7;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"><a rel="noopener" href="https://www.starvoting.org/accuracy" style="box-sizing:border-box;text-decoration:none;font-family:Verdana,sans-serif;background-color:transparent;color:rgb(42,162,179)" target="_blank">Highly
accurate, no matter how many candidates/parties are in
the race.</a></p>
</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<br>
I'm not sure exactly what "accurate" is supposed to mean, but I
refute the suggestion that these claims are more true of STAR than
they are of Hare.<br>
<br>
In the poll I will vote STAR below Hare and Approval and all the
Condorcet methods.</div></div><div><div lang="x-unicode"><br>
<p></p>
<p>Chris<br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div></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>
</blockquote></div></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>