Talk:Instant-runoff voting: Difference between revisions
→Fixing the shortcomings of IRV: Feedback as requested
(→Fixing the shortcomings of IRV: Feedback as requested) |
|||
Line 196:
[[User:RalphInOttawa|RalphInOttawa]] ([[User talk:RalphInOttawa|talk]]) 01:44, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
: Thanks for sending the PDFs via email. I looked at them and see you are attempting to do the same thing as RCIPE, which is to look deeper into the preferences. Also you are attempting to avoid IIA failures by identifying which candidates are irrelevant. The RCIPE method achieves both of those goals using the same "deeper" elimination process (by eliminating pairwise losing candidates). In contrast, your 11 step process is too complex. It seems to do three different calculation methods and chooses the "best" winner of the three. That same approach can be done by using any three methods. I'm not saying your method is bad. I'm saying there are simpler ways to reach the same goals. I commend you for spending time digging deep into the math behind fairer vote-counting methods, which are long overdue for adoption into real elections. --[[User:VoteFair|VoteFair]] ([[User talk:VoteFair|talk]]) 01:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
| |||