I took the raw data from the site Brian Olson posted and ended up with a
slightly different pairwise table:
(0) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
(0)- 5545 6747 3991 6790 7336
(1) 3556- 5165 3397 5136 5875
(2) 1161 1289- 804 2028 3290
(3) 4763 5730 6961- 7027 7351
(4) 987 1318 1869
Let me generalize my argument.
If an IRV election comes down to two candidates left standing, and
one of those candidates is also the Condorcet winner, then the
Condorcet winner must also be the IRV winner.
That seems to be the case in the Burlington example.
--
/Jonathan Lundell.
electio
At 11:08 PM -0500 3/10/06, Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
>At 09:39 PM 3/10/2006, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
>> >Thanks for doing this analysis! This is BIG news in the small world
>>>of voting methods! :-)
>>
>>How so? It's well known that IRV/AV/STV doesn't necessarily find the
>>Condorcet winner. It
> >Thanks for doing this analysis! This is BIG news in the small world
> >of voting methods! :-)
>
> How so? It's well known that IRV/AV/STV doesn't necessarily find the
> Condorcet winner. It shouldn't be too surprising that there are
> real-world examples.
> --
> /Jonathan Lundell.
Yes, Jonatha
At 09:39 PM 3/10/2006, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
> >Thanks for doing this analysis! This is BIG news in the small world
> >of voting methods! :-)
>
>How so? It's well known that IRV/AV/STV doesn't necessarily find the
>Condorcet winner. It shouldn't be too surprising that there are
>real-world examp
At 06:06 PM 3/9/2006, Jan Kok wrote:
>Selecting bottom-tier proxies by secret ballot sure seems like a messy
>problem. Depending on the problem definition (the requirements), I'm
>not confident that there is a solution.
I don't think that it is a serious problem at all. In a secret ballot
system
At 11:07 AM 3/9/2006, Raphael Ryan wrote:
Something which raises an interesting possibility I had not considered before:
>...Another option would be something like meta-proxies. You vote
>for a meta-proxy and they get to vote your vote. However, they
>promise that they will vote it as request
At 7:00 PM -0700 3/10/06, Jan Kok wrote:
>Holy sacred cow, Batman!!
>
>According to Brian's analysis, Miller was the Condorcet winner, but
>Kiss won the actual IRV election. Miller was preferred over Kiss 3991
>to 3455.
>
>Brian, the number of first-choice votes according to your histograms
>doesn
Holy sacred cow, Batman!!
According to Brian's analysis, Miller was the Condorcet winner, but
Kiss won the actual IRV election. Miller was preferred over Kiss 3991
to 3455.
Brian, the number of first-choice votes according to your histograms
doesn't exactly match the numbers on the Burlington el
Here it is folks, the one we've been waiting for:
http://www.ci.burlington.vt.us/ct/elections/
A real live IRV election, run last Tuesday, and different methods give
different results.
The raw data can be downloaded here:
http://www.burlingtonvotes.org/20060307/
I've adapted the data and run
10 matches
Mail list logo
