portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article announcements global

actions & protests | media criticism

STOP PROMOTING RANK CHOICE VOTING!

It has produced fascism everywhere! Get real simple score voting, and support real democracy! Most people are realist/progressive.

Stop being a myrmidon of some fascist think tank!
Ranked Choice will only lock you in to corporate serfdom.

'FairVote' and 'RepresentUS' are FASCIST!

Don't be fooled!

Get simple score voting. Get nothing less!

Dear Sir! 28.Jun.2019 10:49

Tracy Mapes

They like how things are. You do not get a say in the matter.

Let's all go back to sleep.

Arrow criteria? 28.Jun.2019 13:14

Mike Novack

Blues -- I know which of the (apparently) reasonable criteria ranked choice voting will fail to meet << in other words, under what conditions ranked choice voting will give weird/unpleasant results >>

How about you take a look at your own proposal and discuss the conditions under which IT gives weird/unpleasant results? It is going to violate at least one* of the "reasonable" criteria. Which? << some are more important than others >> Or does it violate more than one? << which is also possible >>

If you don't understand what I am talking about, read one of the "layperson's" explanations of Arrow's Theorem, one that shows how this or that proposed voting system satisfies or violates of of the "reasonable results" criteria.

Anybody proposing a voting system needs to do this. Essentially they are making the argument that whatever criteria their proposed system violates is less serious than the problems alternative systems have.

And BTW, I fault the IRV/STV/ranked choice voting folks for this too. Most of them don't even know what are the conditions where ranked choice voting gives screwy results. HOWEVER --- please note that I am NOT making a claim that ranked choice voting is bad/worse than the alternatives. There isn't going to be any PERFECT system that never gives weird/unfortunate results.

Do note, however, that combining systems can eliminate SOME of the problems with ranked choice voting. I don't mean another vote but another/preliminary count. For example, IF the ranked choice ballots are first used for a Condorcet count (they can be counted that way) and only if no Condorcet candidate proceed with the ranked choice count we eliminate the bad situation that there IS a Condorcet candidate that the ranked choice count would eliminate << very bad because there is a majority that preferred the eliminated candidate to the ranked choice winner >>

Those Old Methods Of Analysis Are Known To Be Useless 28.Jun.2019 19:40

blues

Professor Kenneth Arrow passed away in 2017. Toward the end of his life he almost certainly knew that his 'General Impossibility Theorem' which pertains to election systems, was simply, but absolutely, incorrect. It was all based on a 'protoscientific' system. Unfortunately, this essentially alchemical system is still being taught in college courses today.

Even now, many academic people are inventing new election method 'criteria' just about every single day. This is truly sad. Kenneth Arrow's statements in his later years gives the strong impression that he was beginning to understand the disaster that was created by people who attempted, over the course of centuries, to analyze election methods in terms of 'balancing criteria'. That was alchemy, not some form of science. Yet people who believe they are practicing some sort of science still continue to apply these useless attempts at analysis. College students even pay good money to study it!

Near the end of his life, professor Arrow actually endorsed the score voting method.

I intend to explain the real serious problems of 'RCV'/'IRV' voting (which go very far beyond 'nonmonotonicity' -- a term borrowed quite carelessly from set theory) when I get more time.

17 Days ... 30.Jun.2019 18:40

Tracy Mapes

Aliens - Movie Analysis: 1986
 https://youtu.be/ILYdzvSICes?t=136