RCV - Exhausted Choices (Rankings)
-
Please help editing this article: https://electowiki.org/wiki/Exhausted_Choices
-
@masiarek I can't or won't summon the personal energy to help edit it, but I think that whoever does should consult @Sass's video on the subject. One of the phenomena Sass points out in that video is that a vote that gives a full ranking can still be thrown out by RCV IRV Hare.
RCV IRV Bottom-two Runoff (B2R), modified by allowing equal-ranking, is a much better system. To be clear, the modified system differs from RCV IRV Hare in two regards: allowing equal ranking, and applying bottom-two runoff. The way bottom-two runoff works is that at the end of each round of tallying, the bottom two by Hare score (number of top rankings) are examined Llull-wise, that is, we ask whether the second-worst by Hare score was beaten by the worst by Hare score in terms of count of voters that preferred one over the other minus the count with the opposite preference. If so, the second-worst by Hare score is eliminated rather than the worst by Hare score.
Approval-ordered Llull (letter grades) [10], Score // Llull [9], Score, STAR, Approval, other rated Condorcet [8]; equal-ranked Condorcet [4]; strictly-ranked Condorcet [3]; everything else [0].
-
@jack-waugh I don't disagree with BTR being a good option, but Sass's video makes obnoxiously unsupported assertions, such as that IRV is worse the plurality, which is ridiculous. I think he does far more harm than good by putting all his efforts into attacking the one alternative to plurality that is having some success. He also says that plurality and IRV are unconstitutional, which is just dumb.
