<div dir="ltr">I don't think any advocate of approval has ever claimed the winner of an approval election is guaranteed to cross the 50% line.</div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 7:23 AM robert bristow-johnson <<a href="mailto:rbj@audioimagination.com">rbj@audioimagination.com</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 style="margin-bottom:45px">
<div style="font-size:10pt"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Hay listen, people project all the time. Or, at least, often. It's nothing new.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">No one has to engage him. Why not just let him blather to himself?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">But, it *is* interesting that both Approval and IRV advocates like to repeat the same false claim. The 50%+ majorities are guaranteed. An old lie of<span style="font-size:10pt"> FairVote. The denominator of the fraction disenfranchises voters with "exhausted ballots".</span></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div><div dir="auto"><i>Powered by Cricket Wireless</i></div></div></div><div style="font-size:10pt"><div id="m_-2198361435741797279LGEmailHeader" dir="auto"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">------ Original message------</div><div dir="auto"><b>From: </b>Michael Garman<u></u><u></u></div><div dir="auto"><b>Date: </b>Sat, Jun 8, 2024 08:16</div><div dir="auto"><b>To: </b>Michael Ossipoff;</div><div dir="auto"><b>Cc: </b>EM list;Evangeline Moore;</div><div dir="auto"><b>Subject:</b>Re: [EM] inaccurate Fargo approval voting results</div><div dir="auto"><br></div></div><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto">Should I care what you think about anything? Considering you repeat the same bigoted assertions — to use your term — ad nauseam, I’m inclined not to. </div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jun 8, 2024 at 12:32 AM 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:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><br></div><div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 20:32 Michael Garman <<a href="mailto:michael.garman@rankthevote.us" target="_blank">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 style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto">The results were still reported incorrectly. That doesn’t inspire confidence in the system!</div></blockquote><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Should I care what you hav confidence in?</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">If you don’t have confidence in counting approvals, when the only errors didn’t include any wrong winners, then I don’t blame you for especially having no confidence in IRV, whose much longer & more elaborate count was bungled badly enough to elect the wrong winners. 
;</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">I won’t keep replying to Michael G. on this conversation forever. </div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Surely his need to be blocked is obvious.</div></div></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><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 style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"><br></div></blockquote><blockquote class="gmail_quote"><div style="background-color:rgba(0,0,0,0);border-color:rgb(255,255,255);color:rgb(255,255,255)" dir="auto"> keep repeating your delusional conspiracy theories about 2000 and 2004. By your own standards, that’s bigoted assertion, not discussion. </div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 11:26 PM Michael Ossipoff <<a>email9648742@gmail.com</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">For one thing the errors didn’t wrongly report winners. The correct winners were elected.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Unlike some errors in which IRV elected the wrong people.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">…not quite the same thing :-)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Count-fraud wouldn’t be worth the trouble if it didn’t do that too.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">The mountain of evidence reported by Harpers would be unlikely to be accidental error :-)</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Especially given that a voting-machine supplier promised to “deliver” the election to G.W. Bush.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">For details or substantiation I refer you to the Harpers articles after G. W. Bush’s two elections, in 2000 & 2004.</div></div></div><div dir="auto"><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr"><br></div><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 19:46 Michael Garman <<a>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>Turns out approval has its own counting vulnerabilities. I hope someone lets Harper’s magazine know! <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, Jun 7, 2024 at 10:42 PM Michael Ossipoff <<a>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="auto">Thanks for the information. Though some of us will write to them about the mis-reporting, I hope that you will too, or already have. They should definitely hear from the person who noticed it, & not just 2nd-hand.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">It’s a relief that the winners have been correctly
reported.</div><div dir="auto"><br></div><div dir="auto">Again, thank you for pointing that error out.</div><div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Fri, Jun 7, 2024 at 05:28 Evangeline Moore <<a>evangeline.moore@ih21.org</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="ltr"><div class="gmail_signature">Hi everyone,<br></div><div class="gmail_signature"><br></div><div class="gmail_signature">I work at a Czech institute researching voting methods, and a while back I took an interest in the approval voting elections in Fargo. While I was running the numbers, trying to build a model for a separate project, I noticed that the approval vote results have never been accurately reported in Fargo. The winners are ri
ght, but the percentages are not. They've never crossed 50% approval despite being widely reported that way.</div><br>I posted an explanation of this on our website: <a>https://www.ih21.org/aktuality/approval-voting-in-fargo</a> When I realized that another election is coming up and that, as far as I can tell, nobody else has made the methodology publicly known yet, I wanted to get this out there. I also thought you guys might find it interesting. <div><br></div><div>EM</div></div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a rel="noreferrer">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
----<br>
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a rel="noreferrer">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info<br>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</blockquote></div></div>
</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>