A tweak to IRV to make it a Condorcet method
-
@wolftune this is a well-known Condorcet method due in spirit to Tideman and called “Bottom N Runoff” where N=2 (hence “Bottom Two Runoff,” I.e. BTR or B2R). Generally speaking, these methods use some kind of absolute criterion (like least number of first place votes, lowest score, lowest approval, etc.) to decide which “bottom” candidates to subject to an elimination round, eliminates a Condorcet loser among them, and iterates until the desired number of winners remain. You are right, they’re pretty good methods. I like them.
score-stratified-condorcet [10] cardinal-condorcet [9] ranked-condorcet [8] score [7] approval [6] ranked-bucklin [5] star [4] ranked-irv [3] ranked-borda [2] for-against [1] distribute [0] choose-one [0]
-
@cfrank yeah, after posting I went further into the electowiki link etc
But I think my key view isn't just the decency of the method but the marketing as "IRV tweak". I imagine so much more success talking to RCV advocates and saying, "hey, there's a tweak that really improves RCV, it's just doing a bottom-two runoff when eliminating candidates…" and it sounds so much more "yes and" than other ways of bringing up issues with methods in practice…
-
If equal-ranking is permitted at the bottom (e. g., by leaving candidates unmarked) but not permitted at the top, then the Frohnmayer equality constraint is violated.
-
BTR-Score is easier to explain than IRV. No need to talk about transferring votes.
Rated methods are generally simple, here is may take on a few:
Score Voting Methods – Score, STAR, and BTR-Score -
@gregw for some reason, I can't click the link to see that other post you are referencing, but I was able to look into BTR-score mentioned in various places. I agree it is fine, but it is much bigger step (less of just a tweak) to go from people assuming RCV/IRV is all there is. Given a world of naive people just thinking IRV is the only alternative, the smallest tweak from there is easier to promote. With BTR-IRV, the ballot style can stay the same.
I'm not saying BTR-IRV is ideal, I'm saying it's more practical in the context of political reality.
-
@wolftune, any number of times, I have responded to PropagandaName's Tweets in favor of not-further-specified RCV by asking "Why do you oppose bottom-two runoff?". There has not been much response. Maybe more voices repeating the same question would help draw attention to it.
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 if you are describing RR from FV, I once had an argument about the bullet-vote claim and score voting, and it devolved to be obvious that some people have no interest in even softening their confidence about something in light of being questioned. I don't use Twitter/X at all anymore. I think best to bring up BTR in whatever random conversations when RCV comes up. More people will bring it up when more people know it is a thing etc.
-
-
Link fixed, I got a little sloppy with the paste.
-
@wolftune I do like this idea, it would also improve IRV-PR. Have you consider proposing this to RCV advocates?
-
@brian-lackey I think the main point is to use this to prompt IRV advocates to look at this issue, yes. I do not have plans to spend lots of time making this happen myself though
