Brian Olson wrote: >Outside this list, I've been plugging "rankings and >ratings ballots" as the generic label for the issue. >I deliberately want to leave the back-end counting method >vague due to the IRV - the world feud.
That's an important point. As voting methods as opposed to counting methods, IRV and Condorcet are identical or nearly so and will be seen that way by voters. They will differ only if there are different ranking instructions, such as "you must rank all candidates" or "you may rank any two or more candidates equally." But assuming ranking instructions are identical, the only differences in the two are in how they interpret ballots after an election to determine winners. Both take information from ranked ballots and use it to simulate the results of voting methods that are too complicated and time consuming to be used in public elections. IRV simulates a series of elections in which one candidate is eliminated after each election, while Condorcet simulates an election in which voters are presented with all possible pairs of candidates and asked to choose the one in each pair they prefer more. >Virtual Round Robin vs. Instant Round Robin vs. Condorcet. >IRR is too close to IRV and may lead to confusion. I >suppose that's a desirable trait if you want to play on >the credibility that IRV has in some places, but I don't >want that. I haven't seen "IRR" in usage, but I may be >missing a proper tour of the election methods canonical >literature. Either way I think we should promote usage >of a descriptive name over the dead-french-guy name. You worry that the two methods will be confused if they are similarly abbreviated, but abbreviations are introduced only AFTER the phrases they represent are introduced. No one but very careless readers will confuse them. IRV is no more likely to be confused with IRR than NBA is likely to be confused with NBC. As for playing on the credibility IRV has in some places, who is doing that? I'm not aware of anyone who is. The point of using the word "instant" to describe both IRV and Condorcet is to clearly show a fundamental similarity of the two methods. As pointed out above, both take information from basically identical ranked ballots and use them to simulate the results of voting methods that are too complicated and time consuming to be used in public elections. As I argued before, IRV is no more "instant" or any less "virtual" than Condorcet voting. The same word should be used for both of them. You also overlook the importance of using names that don't unnecessarily favor one method more than another. But the name you have chosen for Condorcet, "virtual round robin tournament," disfavors it compared to IRV for two reasons. First "instant" will sound much more favorable to most people than "virtual." Instant brings to mind positive qualities like streamlined and efficient, while virtual brings to mind qualities like artificial and nerdy that will seem negative to many people. Second, calling a method a "tournament" brings to mind unserious qualities like those people associate with games. It is arguably not a good word to use to describe a serious voting method unless your goal is to put it in an unfavorable light. If you haven't seen "IRR" in usage, then you haven't been paying much attention. It has been used on this list a number of times. You also have apparently failed to check it out with rudimentary search methods such as a quick Google search. When I tried IRR and "voting method" I came up with 110 hits. When I tried VRR and "voting method" I came up with 7 hits, none of which appeared to refer to Condorcet voting. When I tried "virtual round robin tournament," I came up with three hits, two of which were from your website. When I tried "virtual round robin voting" I came up with zero hits. As for the history of different names and abbreviations, I doubt that anyone could give a very authoritative account of them. I can tell you that I first heard IRR suggested as a name about ten years ago by Steve Eppley on another list. At the time, IRV had also not yet come into widespread usage. People were calling instant runoff voting IRO or other things. At the time, the Center for Voting and Democracy had not settled on IRV as the best abbreviation and only recently had become aware that advocating IRV might be a good idea as a way of getting people to think about proportional representation, which was a much bigger issue with them at the time. I agree that "we should promote usage of a descriptive name over the dead-french-guy name," but the name you've chosen for Condorcet voting and propose to permanently incorporate into California law is not the one I believe we should choose. I urge you to reconsider the wording you have submitted, at least until you have gotten feedback from enough Condorcet advocates to show that most are likely to accept your proposed name. -Ralph Suter ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info