Mike, you wrote: >My comment wasn't a reply to the Davis article. That website, I was told, > >discusses electoral reform and voting systems in general. I posted there >by >clicking on "comment", and I realized at the time that it would post as a >reply to that article. I didn't care, and only wanted to post my voting >system comments.
Well, alright. I don't think that it's a big deal either way. I just thought that I should let you know that "choice voting" refers to STV-PR, and that the strongest anti-IRV arguments don't really apply there. Again, I don't think it's a big deal, but if I was you I would have posted my comments to a page that focuses IRV, or just sent them directly to the people responsible for the site. > >I'd been told that that was a voting system website, and I expected that >IRV >wouldn't be unheard of there. Yes. That was the Santa Monica Ranked Voting group. They advocate both IRV and STV. It looks like they're just starting out. > >But, aside from that, I didn't know that Choice Voting only refers to >multiwinner elections. Are you sure about that? Yes. In the parlance of most American IRV/STV groups (including that one), "choice voting" = STV-PR. Definitely one of the least descriptive voting method names I've ever heard, but if it works for them, great. > James ---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info