1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. REC.AUDIO.OPINION

  • Even stupid mathematicians can't get it right

    From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Fri Nov 25 23:07:28 2022
    https://lawliberty.org/the-flaws-of-ranked-choice/

    I think they're bogged down in vocabulary.

    But their final scenario is a great example. There is no winner as every allocation of 2nd's changes the outcome.

    B is eliminated in round1 and

    C beats A. But A's votes go to B giving B the victory over C.

    But when C is eliminated A beats B...but after removing B...C beats A.

    The circle never ends. But I'd give it to B with largest margin of victory even though they had the fewest first place votes.

    Bottom line, Ranked choice is too f'd up.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Sat Nov 26 09:34:13 2022
    On 11/26/22 1:07 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://lawliberty.org/the-flaws-of-ranked-choice/

    I think they're bogged down in vocabulary.

    But their final scenario is a great example. There is no winner as every allocation of 2nd's changes the outcome.

    B is eliminated in round1 and

    C beats A. But A's votes go to B giving B the victory over C.

    If B is eliminated, they don't get those votes, they're exhausted.

    But when C is eliminated A beats B...but after removing B...C beats A.

    The circle never ends. But I'd give it to B with largest margin of victory even though they had the fewest first place votes.

    That's the round robin I mentioned. Glad you're catching up.

    Bottom line, Ranked choice is too f'd up.

    Problem avoided if you eliminate the unviable candidates as you go.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From ScottW@21:1/5 to All on Sat Nov 26 08:54:16 2022
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 7:34:15 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
    On 11/26/22 1:07 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://lawliberty.org/the-flaws-of-ranked-choice/

    I think they're bogged down in vocabulary.

    But their final scenario is a great example. There is no winner as every allocation of 2nd's changes the outcome.

    B is eliminated in round1 and

    C beats A. But A's votes go to B giving B the victory over C.
    If B is eliminated, they don't get those votes, they're exhausted.

    You're exhausted.

    But when C is eliminated A beats B...but after removing B...C beats A.

    The circle never ends. But I'd give it to B with largest margin of victory even though they had the fewest first place votes.
    That's the round robin I mentioned. Glad you're catching up.
    Bottom line, Ranked choice is too f'd up.
    Problem avoided if you eliminate the unviable candidates as you go.

    As always, Stephen has no problem with not doing the right thing.

    They're all unviable with no clear winner. Georgia's runoff is better.

    ScottW

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From mINE109@21:1/5 to ScottW on Sat Nov 26 12:32:49 2022
    On 11/26/22 10:54 AM, ScottW wrote:
    On Saturday, November 26, 2022 at 7:34:15 AM UTC-8, MINe109 wrote:
    On 11/26/22 1:07 AM, ScottW wrote:
    https://lawliberty.org/the-flaws-of-ranked-choice/

    I think they're bogged down in vocabulary.

    But their final scenario is a great example. There is no winner as every allocation of 2nd's changes the outcome.

    B is eliminated in round1 and

    C beats A. But A's votes go to B giving B the victory over C.
    If B is eliminated, they don't get those votes, they're exhausted.

    You're exhausted.

    But I'm happy you caught on to the voting cycle paradox only a few days
    after I mentioned it.

    But when C is eliminated A beats B...but after removing B...C beats A.

    The circle never ends. But I'd give it to B with largest margin of victory even though they had the fewest first place votes.
    That's the round robin I mentioned. Glad you're catching up.
    Bottom line, Ranked choice is too f'd up.
    Problem avoided if you eliminate the unviable candidates as you go.

    As always, Stephen has no problem with not doing the right thing.

    Right thing: majority of votes decides the winner. Tom Petty thing: even
    the losers get lucky sometime.

    They're all unviable with no clear winner.

    That's why the instant runoff ranked choice system is being used.

    Georgia's runoff is better.

    Alaska produced a majority after the third round, as designed.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)