Dear voting methods fans,
I am interested in knowing how everyone here feels about this question:
Which is better, IRV or Plurality?
By every measure I consider important, I see no difference between the two. They should both be absolutely avoided.
Plurality is probably not worthy of any discussion...
As for IRV, this case clearly shows a tremendous problem with the system. (modified from prior postings)
40 A 35 C > B 30 B
A simply should not win and it does under IRV (http://www.fairvote.org/irv/irv_orgs.htm) even though > 60% of the voters preferred B....who got eliminated in the very first round.
Of course, many other examples showing the absolute deficiencies of IRV can be presented.
I am fairly sure that IRV, Condorcet, and Approval people should try to treat each other as allies rather than competitors, and that they should not try to strawman or exclude each others' systems.
While there are at least be some questions regarding Approval vs. certain versions of Condorcet, I don't there is any argument left in the support of IRV over these two obviously superior methods.
(However, I definitely prefer RP Condorcet (Deterministic #1-wv)...or whatever Mike O. was calling it...don't have it in front of me at the moment....over all other single-winner methods I am aware of.)
And I will let others on this list deal with the various other issues you presented...
-- == Eric Gorr ========= http://www.ericgorr.net ========= ICQ:9293199 === "Therefore the considerations of the intelligent always include both benefit and harm." - Sun Tzu == Insults, like violence, are the last refuge of the incompetent... === ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
