Re:instant runoffs (Score 1)

Sorry to post so many messages in one day. This is my 1st day on the bulletin board, and the only day when I'll post this much. Also, this is my last message for today. Metis said that Instant Runoff (IRV) is the only method that he knows of that doesn't force voters to vote strategically, to express a preference that they don't have in order to avoid having their preference ignored altogether. Actually, IRV _does_ force voters to strategically vote preferences that they don't have. Maybe if you vote Nader in 1st place, he'll eliminate Gore, and then lose to Bush. Bush wins because Gore got eliminated while your traveling vote was on Nader. This will be common. Say that Favorite, Middle, & Worst are known to be roughly equal in 1st choice support. So no one has a majority. Say Middle is closer to Worst, and so Middle will transfer to Worst if Middle is eliminated. Now, as a Favorite voter, do you have any reason to rank sincerely? No. Favorite can't win. He can't have a majority, and noting will transfer to him from Middle. By voting Middle in 1st place, you can protect Middle from immediate elimination, and help him win, keep Worst from winning. Voting Middle 1st can get a better result than voting Favorite 1st, but voting Favorite 1st can't get a better result than voting Middle 1st. Voting Middle in 1st place, therefore, dominates voting Favorite in 1st place. Strategically, voting Middle in 1st place, over Favorite, is all that makes sense, if you're a Favorite voter whose 2nd choice is Middle. So, Metis, IRV forces you to vote an unfelt preference. It forces you to reverse a preference. With Approval, no one ever has any incentive to vote someone else over their favorite. Metis spoke of preferences ignored. IRV ignores your preference for Gore over Bush when it eliminates Gore while your vote is on Nader. That's why I say that IRV is unconstitutional, because, when it violates the one person one (counted) vote principle, it violates the equal protection clause, when it capriciously chooses whose preferences to count & whose to ignore. Mike Ossipoff