On 8.7.2011, at 17.16, Andy Jennings wrote: > Also, I think IRV's seemingly intuitive nature has something to do with it. > For those who *did* investigate more deeply, IRV seemed sensible, too: > instead of holding a bunch of expensive runoffs, collect all the required > information at once and then act as if there were runoffs. That fails to > account for the dynamics between the rounds, but that's a subtle detail and > might easily be missed. > > I, too, must admit that IRV has a natural feeling to it. I had a friend who > described to me a system he thought of "on his own" and he ended up > describing IRV.
I agree with that (as one reason). It is a bit like natural selection, or a like fight of strong men where the weakest ones must leave the arena first. Juho
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
