On 4/6/2012 12:45 PM, robert bristow-johnson wrote:
...
Question 5. If you have not signed the Declaration, why?
i had a couple of problems. two that i remember is that it cited the
2009 Mayoral election in my town, Burlington Vermont, as an example of
the failure of Instant Runoff Voting, and, indeed IRV *did* fail that
year (and has been repealed the following year, by a small margin). but
the reason given for the dissatisfaction of Burlingtonians mentioned in
the declaration is not accurate. the Burlington voters are not as
sophisticated as folks on the election-methods list or otherwise engaged
in election reform. the reason given is more of a reflection of what
persons who study these different methods have for rejecting IRV, but
voters that voted to repeal IRV in Burlington believed (incorrectly,
IMO) that IRV robbed the Plurality winner of his legitimate election.
most of us on this list understand that the root to the failure of IRV
that year was that the Condorcet winner (a.k.a. the "pairwise champion")
was not elected.
Should the example in the Declaration be changed from Burlington to Aspen?
This question applies to all signers, not just Robert. In order to
justify this change all, or at least almost all, the signers would have
to agree -- or at least not object -- to making this change.
(Either is fine with me.)
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
