On Dec 7, 2011, at 1:31 PM, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
Dave:
On Dec 6, 2011, at 4:19 PM, MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:
How to vote in IRV:
When there are completely unacceptable candidates who might
win (I call that condition u/a, for “unacceptable/acceptable”)
You replied:
You DO NOT rank such since, if you rank such a candidate, so might
enough others for this one to win - you do not want to be part of
causing such a win.
[endquote]
But your vote won't reach the candidates whom you consider
unacceptable
unless and until all of the acceptable candidates have been
eliminated.
So, by that time, it's no longer a question of _whether_ an
unacceptable
will win. It's only a question of _which_ unacceptable will win.
But of course it's vastly more important to elect an acceptable vs
determining which unacceptable wins. Still, if you have time, then
you might as well rank the unacceptables too, so that, at least,
the _worst_ ones won't win.
Voters do not necessarily agree as to which are acceptable.
If I decide, alone, what to do, then I decide based on being alone.
If a group of voters decide, each alone but thinking alike based on
your thoughts, your words could inspire enough acting together to have
an effect. Inspiring this group to vote for unacceptables could cause
such to win.
IRV, like many methods, has a relatively simple strategy:
Rank the acceptable candidates in order of (some guessed or
complicatedly-calculated measure of) their popularity.
Rank in the order of what YOU see as should be most popular first.
[endquote]
Yes--You must guess which acceptable is most likely to be helped to
win
by your top ranking. And then, which of the remaining acceptables is
most
likely to be helped to win by your 2nd-place ranking...etc.
It gets tricky in IRV.
You want the proper winner to be your top rank when the counters are
looking for what you see as proper CW. Therefore any you rank higher
better be read before reading this one - which is easiest if you vote
your choice as top rank.
If you also want another as a possible winner, rank it also per the
above paragraph - double tricky since no one can know the order the
counters will see until the ballots have been voted.
Ideally, then rank the unacceptables in order of some
complicated combination of their disutility and
(some guessed or complicatedly-calculated measure of) their
popularity.
Actually, ignore that last paragraph. In u/a, all the
unacceptables are just unacceptable. What matters is the election of
an
acceptable instead of an unacceptable.
In u/a, IRV is just ranked Plurality. In Plurality you vote
for the acceptable candidate who is most popular (most likely to get
the most
votes).
Read that carefully. You do not vote for unacceptable here
[endquote]
Quite so. You never vote for an unacceptable in Plurality
...unless you're a Democrat-voting progressive :-)
But you shouldn't.
Vote for the acceptable most likely to be helped to win by your vote.
...the acceptable most likely to be the best votegetter among the
acceptables.
Mike Ossipoff
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
