Talk:Later-no-help criterion: Difference between revisions
m
→Failing Later-no-help in IRV
(→Failing Later-no-help in IRV: new section) |
|||
Line 25:
If the voter’s intention is to help C because there really is a preference over B, then this change is sincere. That’s well worth creating a tie in which this voter’s candidates of choice have two thirds of a chance to win. It’s later-some-help.
If these voters were replacing A>B (their sincere choice) with A>C, then it’s a tactical move to make the result into a tie when it isn’t there. I can see a candidate wanting to do that, but not a voter. Before changing, these voters were hoping for A or B, and they got B (having indicated they didn’t want C). After the change, they are getting A or B or C. Why choose a one third chance of losing completely when you already have a guarantee
[[User:RalphInOttawa|RalphInOttawa]] ([[User talk:RalphInOttawa|talk]]) 14:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)
| |||