4 ms·

Would you mind explaining more about what you mean regarding the recent Alaska election? The information I have found about it made it seem fairly reasonable an

by jrgoff 4y ago

Would you mind explaining more about what you mean regarding the recent Alaska election? The information I have found about it made it seem fairly reasonable and straightforward to me, but perhaps I am missing something.

wnoise 4y ago
Here's a decent commentary: https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/x9oupk/2022_alaska_special_general_vote_breakdown/ https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/x9oupk/2022_alaska... > Two popular suspicions are now confirmed. Nick Begich was the Condorcet winner. Sarah Palin was a spoiler candidate - her presence caused Mary Peltola to be elected, by prematurely eliminating Nick Begich. Here's another, that got down-voted to hell, because of the audience. https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardPartyUSA/comments/xb119e/its_official_alaskas_first_rank_choice_voting/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardPartyUSA/comments/xb119e/its... > If 2913 voters who supported Palin first and Begich second flipped their first and second preferences, they’d have gotten a more preferred result. (i.e. they would have gotten Begich instead of Peltola, by having Palin eliminated first) > Even worse, if instead 5825 of those same types of voters just decided not to vote, they’d have also gotten a better result. So merely participating in the election hurt them. While I do prefer the winner it selected, it's not a great election method. Better than FPTP is a terribly low bar.
- jrgoff 4y ago
  I see, that was helpful - thank you!
- peatmoss 4y ago
  Condorcet has arguably worse features: 1. Even harder to explain to the average voter than RCV 2. Greater likelihood of nobody winning / needing to conduct new election I am of the belief that RCV is not great, but that it is significantly better than status quo... and it is possible.
  - wnoise 4y ago
    For 1, meh. Marking is the same and it is much closer to incentivizing honest reporting. For 2, everyone advocating for Condorcet has some favorite cycle-breaker. Mostly it doesn't matter; it's a lot more rare than non-monotonicity in IRV. But my favorite is approval.

by jrgoff 4y ago

wnoise 4y ago

Here's a decent commentary: https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/x9oupk/2022_alaska_special_general_vote_breakdown/ https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/x9oupk/2022_alaska... > Two popular suspicions are now confirmed. Nick Begich was the Condorcet winner. Sarah Palin was a spoiler candidate - her presence caused Mary Peltola to be elected, by prematurely eliminating Nick Begich. Here's another, that got down-voted to hell, because of the audience. https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardPartyUSA/comments/xb119e/its_official_alaskas_first_rank_choice_voting/ https://www.reddit.com/r/ForwardPartyUSA/comments/xb119e/its... > If 2913 voters who supported Palin first and Begich second flipped their first and second preferences, they’d have gotten a more preferred result. (i.e. they would have gotten Begich instead of Peltola, by having Palin eliminated first) > Even worse, if instead 5825 of those same types of voters just decided not to vote, they’d have also gotten a better result. So merely participating in the election hurt them. While I do prefer the winner it selected, it's not a great election method. Better than FPTP is a terribly low bar.

jrgoff 4y ago
I see, that was helpful - thank you!
peatmoss 4y ago
Condorcet has arguably worse features: 1. Even harder to explain to the average voter than RCV 2. Greater likelihood of nobody winning / needing to conduct new election I am of the belief that RCV is not great, but that it is significantly better than status quo... and it is possible.
- wnoise 4y ago
  For 1, meh. Marking is the same and it is much closer to incentivizing honest reporting. For 2, everyone advocating for Condorcet has some favorite cycle-breaker. Mostly it doesn't matter; it's a lot more rare than non-monotonicity in IRV. But my favorite is approval.