This is simply false. Approval Voting is one of the best voting methods as measured by Bayesian Regret, and is extremely resistant to tactical voting. www.electology.org/tactical-voting www.electology.org/threshold By contrast, most ranked voting methods fall to the Naive Exaggeration Strategy. ScoreVoting.net/NESD.html This is especially problematic for Instant Runoff Voting. www.electology.org/irv-plurality

Score Voting (aka Range Voting) is certainly better than Condorcet. ScoreVoting.net/BayRegsFig.html ScoreVoting.net/CondBurial.html ScoreVoting.net/AppCW.html It is mathematically proven that the Condorcet winner is not necessarily the "right" winner (social utility maximizer), therefore the very POINT of Condorcet methods is the wrong one. They just happen to be pretty good. But since, in practice, most voters will naively exaggerate when they have a ranked ballot, essentially any ranked voting method will degenerate approximately into Plurality Voting in practice. ScoreVoting.net/NESD.html

Exactly. And it has lower Bayesian regret, which is more important. (The Condorcet winner is not necessarily the true social utility maximizer.) ScoreVoting.net/BayRegsFig.html

or i just think having two cases of the same letters is archaic and inefficient, and pointless since spoken words have no case.

i switched to dvorak around 1999. i haven't looked back. it is just so far superior to qwerty, in terms of comfort, that i couldn't imagine it any other way.

I think it may work - and it's from an awesome company. Hopefully it works for a non-profit, just as well with donors as with "customers". http://www.highrisehq.com/

But Bayesian regret is the measure of the sum total of all flaws (even ones that have never been invented/discovered).

http://rangevoting.org/BayRegDum.html

Score Voting has lower Bayesian regret than the other feasible methods, and is simpler than most of themo.