Re: Comment on Results for Ca¢s 2016 Primary Election (fwd)

[robert <http://dummy.us.eu.org/robert>]

The Debian project uses https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method which
is a variant of the Condorcet system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system has a bunch of systems.  The
one that Doug describes here is "approval voting".  I think he's
referencing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting#cite_note-28
which says that, in most cases, it elects Condorcet winners.

 > From: "Disqus" <http://www.disqus.net/~notifications>
 > Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 17:42:34 -0000
 > 
 > Doug Meserve wrote, in response to Noelle:
 > 
 > That might be ideal, except that there are still unresolved issues about the 
 > mechanics.  From what I've read, the popular "instant runoff" method leads 
 > to chaotic results once any 3rd-party candidate starts getting enough votes 
 > to matter, including cases where ranking a candidate higher can actually 
 > hurt that candidate's chances in the final result.  The better method, "
 > Condorcet," gives a much cleaner picture of voter preferences, but also has 
 > the possibility (though unlikely) of winding up with "cycles," where 
 > candidate A wins over B, B wins over C, but then also C wins over A!  Such a 
 > result basically means a tie, which again may be a true representation of 
 > voters' intent, but then the question becomes how to break such ties.  There 
 > are a variety of methods, and therein lies the hangup that is stalling 
 > implementation.  Also, Condorcet requires some significant computation to 
 > tally up correctly, meaning that it's very hard to do by hand in any kind of 
 > recount situation.
 > 
 > The "vote for two" idea is much, much simpler for everyone involved, and yet 
 > will give just about as good results as Condorcet, from what I understand.  
 > It also has a big advantage of being a very small tweak of the current 
 > system.
 > 
 > Link to comment: 
 > https://disq.us/url?impression=619fdf28-2da0-11e6-9327-002590f38886&experiment=digests&behavior=click&url=https%3A%2F%2Fww2.kqed.org%2Fforum%2F2016%2F06%2F07%2Fresults-for-cas-2016-primary-election%2F%23comment-2719144098%3AyPJNb85dz9_Ac6kMDlnRXIssjiA&type=notification.post.registered&variant=active&event=email
 > 
 > Noelle wrote:
 > 
 > how about ranked choice voting?
 > 
 > -----
 > Options:  Reply with "Like" to like this comment, or respond in the body to 
 > post a reply comment.