Adam Tarr said: > It seems from previous posts that Donald and other IRV backers do not > really see a distinction between the left, center, right example and > the one I just gave. In their minds, the center candidate is weak, > just like the Green and Libertarian candidates I show above. The fact > that your center candidate is preferred by a majority over every other > candidate just doesn't strike them as significant.
I think you hit on the fundamental reason why some people are staunch advocates of IRV. The concern with absolute rankings (rather than relative rankings) produces arguments that are self-consistent, and hence impossible to argue against. Never mind that relative rankings reflect comparisons of merit, while absolute rankings depend (in part) on the presence or absence of additional candidates. (Hence this physicist likes like Condorcet: It's all relative ;) The different postulates used by IRV and Condorcet supporters reminds me of an economics joke: Two guys are standing in their respective yards and shouting at each other. An economist walks by with his friend. The friend says "Do you think they'll ever reach an agreement?" The economist says "No. They're arguing from different premises." Alex ---- For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em
