Talk:Favorite betrayal criterion: Difference between revisions
Talk:Favorite betrayal criterion (view source)
Revision as of 16:39, 13 December 2023
, 5 months ago→A better IRV needs a better example.
(Using subst to add Template:TalkPageIntro to this page and made the page more suitable for discussion) |
|||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 12:
Is there a corresponding criterion for making it safe to give lowest support to your least-favorite candidate? — [[User:Psephomancy|Psephomancy]] ([[User talk:Psephomancy|talk]]) 15:55, 8 December 2019 (UTC)
== A better IRV needs a better example. ==
I have an improved version of IRV that does not fail in the example given.
There is no need for any of the 10 supporters of A>B>C>D to change their votes. I have an example (#11) on my spreadsheet demonstrator that turns a candidate’s loss into a three way tie that requires a random draw to win. That’s less rewarding than the outright win granted in IRV. Therefore, I would like to claim that although it can still fail, it is a better version of IRV.
(Is it still considered IRV? See the link on my user page).
[[User:RalphInOttawa|RalphInOttawa]] ([[User talk:RalphInOttawa|talk]]) 09:09, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
| |||