4 ms·

I don't think IRV is worse than first-past-the-post (FPTP) at all. IRV eliminates vote splitting, reduces strategic voting, and results in fewer wasted votes. A

I don't think IRV is worse than first-past-the-post (FPTP) at all. IRV eliminates vote splitting, reduces strategic voting, and results in fewer wasted votes. Also, the fact that IRV ignores all rankings except the first until the first is eliminated means that you won't hurt your most preferred candidate by changing the order of your other preferences. If you're voting A>B>C, then if A wins, then you wouldn't really care whether you helped B win or not. Approval voting has the problem of electing a candidate that's acceptable instead of one who the majority actually likes. Also, IRV has a greater tendency to elect the Condorcet winner when compared to FPTP. Every voting system has its problems but IRV is still a lot better than FPTP.

JoshTriplett 11y ago
> I don't think IRV is worse than first-past-the-post (FPTP) at all. IRV eliminates vote splitting, reduces strategic voting, and results in fewer wasted votes. Also, the fact that IRV ignores all rankings except the first until the first is eliminated means that you won't hurt your most preferred candidate by changing the order of your other preferences. If you're voting A>B>C, then if A wins, then you wouldn't really care whether you helped B win or not. IRV doesn't eliminate strategic voting. Yes, if A is going to win, then A>B>C is great. However, voting A>B>C rather than B>A>C can cause C to win instead of B. It doesn't "eliminate vote splitting" except in the case where a third-party candidate has no chance; in the case where the third-party candidate actually has a chance, IRV can break horribly. See http://minguo.info/election_methods/irv http://minguo.info/election_methods/irv and http://minguo.info/election_methods/evaluation http://minguo.info/election_methods/evaluation . > Approval voting has the problem of electing a candidate that's acceptable instead of one who the majority actually likes. And that's a bug? Approval tends to find satisficing solutions, yes. Condorcet does better, though; it's just harder to deploy (but no harder than IRV).
- ClayShentrup 11y ago
  Condorcet is better? http://ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html http://ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html

JoshTriplett 11y ago

> I don't think IRV is worse than first-past-the-post (FPTP) at all. IRV eliminates vote splitting, reduces strategic voting, and results in fewer wasted votes. Also, the fact that IRV ignores all rankings except the first until the first is eliminated means that you won't hurt your most preferred candidate by changing the order of your other preferences. If you're voting A>B>C, then if A wins, then you wouldn't really care whether you helped B win or not. IRV doesn't eliminate strategic voting. Yes, if A is going to win, then A>B>C is great. However, voting A>B>C rather than B>A>C can cause C to win instead of B. It doesn't "eliminate vote splitting" except in the case where a third-party candidate has no chance; in the case where the third-party candidate actually has a chance, IRV can break horribly. See http://minguo.info/election_methods/irv http://minguo.info/election_methods/irv and http://minguo.info/election_methods/evaluation http://minguo.info/election_methods/evaluation . > Approval voting has the problem of electing a candidate that's acceptable instead of one who the majority actually likes. And that's a bug? Approval tends to find satisficing solutions, yes. Condorcet does better, though; it's just harder to deploy (but no harder than IRV).

ClayShentrup 11y ago
Condorcet is better? http://ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html http://ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html