Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [RangeVoting] Re: Reality check: IRV vs Range and actually building a 3rd party

Expand Messages
  • Juho Laatu
    Joe seems to be interested in achieving two targets (and these targets only) - ability to vote sincerely - ability to vote for a third party The only methods
    Message 1 of 128 , Jan 1, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Joe seems to be interested in achieving
      two targets (and these targets only)
      - ability to vote sincerely
      - ability to vote for a third party

      The only methods under consideration
      seem to be Range and IRV.

      You want to get good selling arguments
      for Range.

      You don't want to hear about the
      weaknesses of IRV (while weaknesses of
      Range can be discussed).

      It is not easy to find good marketing
      arguments for Range in this situation.

      In sincere votes IRV is maybe better.
      There are cases where sincere voting is
      bad in IRV too but those cases are more
      rare (and often complex enough so that
      regular voters may not vote
      strategically even when that would be
      beneficial to them).

      In the ability to vote for third parties
      both methods are quite ok when the third
      party has no chances. IRV has some more
      risks involved and that could be used to
      attack it. When the third party grows to
      a major party Range will have more
      problems.

      The next step of the Range promoters
      would probably be to attack the anomalies
      of IRV. But you banned that track (and it
      would anyway be partly based on trying to
      exaggerate the problems of IRV).

      Juho


      --- On Thu, 1/1/09, steveel2 <stevegeneral999@...> wrote:

      > --- In RangeVoting@yahoogroups.com, Juho Laatu
      > <juho4880@...> wrote:
      >
      > > One quick response would be to say
      > > "in Range you can vote for the third
      > > party".
      >
      > Joe counters, "Oh yeah? I can do that in IRV"
      >
      > Result so far: Joe has not budged an inch AND you have
      > spent your first (and therefore best) bullet to convince
      > him
      > to support RV.
      >
      >
      > > And maybe add "I'm sorry but
      > > you better vote strategically and
      > > give full points also to some of the
      > > leading candidates".
      >
      > Joe counters: "Hey wait a minute.... I'm here at
      > this townhall
      > meeting because the current system compels me to be
      > dishonest, and I
      > think that stinks. Now you guys are saying you have the
      > magic cure
      > and it ALSO compels me to be dishonest? Get lost!"
      >
      > Result so far: You have destroyed any vestige of
      > credibility with Joe.
      >
      >
      > Any other thoughts?
      >
      > Steve E
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >
    • steveel2
      ... For myself, I go one step further. It is one thing for the system to ALLOW sincere votes, and it is another for the system to not coerce people into
      Message 128 of 128 , Jan 3, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In RangeVoting@yahoogroups.com, Juho Laatu <juho4880@...> wrote:
        >
        > --- On Sat, 3/1/09, Bruce R. Gilson <brgster@...> wrote:
        >
        > > --- In RangeVoting@yahoogroups.com, "steveel2"
        > > <stevegeneral999@>
        > > wrote:
        > >
        > >
        > > > Bruce, I'm curious how you (and anyone else) feel
        > > about strategic
        > > > voting, per se. Is it a curse? A boon?

        > I believe most voters definitely want to have
        > a method that allows them to vote sincerely.
        > That is already difficult enough.


        For myself, I go one step further. It is one thing for the system to
        ALLOW sincere votes, and it is another for the system to not coerce
        people into forgoing that option. In other words, among other things
        my ideal system would minimize the liklihood that ANYONE would vote
        strategically.

        Steve E

        PS Call me naive....
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.