• Max@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    13 days ago

    I’ve looked into this before, and most of the cases where rcv fails seem relatively unlikely in real elections. I’d be happy with Star, IRV, RCV/IRV ballots with the runoff process modified to be a Condorcet method, approval. So I’ll support any initiative to change to any of these systems.

    Saying that IRV has glaring problems that make it not much better than fptp seems unsubstantiated.

    For any voting system you propose, there are going to be properties you want that it fails, but like, some of those seem more important in real elections than others most of the time, and IRV seems reasonable in most cases.

    Am I missing something big?

    • PhilipTheBucket@ponder.catOPM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      12 days ago

      Yeah, I really don’t understand this “it’s only 150% better than FPTP, it is HORROR, we need to avoid” point of view.

      If there’s something else better, then great. Advocate for that. In the meantime please don’t try to stop us switching from FPTP to RCV. Some of their other points, that experimenting with thing 1 one time will lead to not wanting to experiment with thing 2 a different time, just seem nutty to me.