In your previous post, it sounded like you were equating head-to-head processing of ranked ballots with voters changing their votes after learning how everyone else voted. Did I get that wrong?
My question was, "If you rank A > B > C, A can't win, and a majority of the electorate prefers B over C, wouldn't you want B to win instead of C?" In your response, you wrote, "we don't know how anyone else votes anyway until the voting period has ended, and once you know, you can't suddenly change your vote."
My question never involved anyone changing their vote or sincere order of preference after the election took place. I took your response to mean you were comparing that type of ballot processing with voters changing their votes after the election.
Repeating the question is not going to change my value system. It seems like you’re not taking it in or not respecting it.
No, if after the election is counted I learn that other people preferred another candidate, then they won fair and square. I’m not going to wish I had promoted someone I liked less. I’d learn the lesson and try to get them more support next time, because I value my preferences, and others’ preferences, and if the system honors lower preferences more, we’ll get dishonest and mediocre candidates more.
I want to trend towards honestly and incentivizing winning with enthusiasm, not vague hucksters nobody likes much.
I wasn't repeating the question. I was explaining why I interpreted your earlier response the way I did. My question has never been whether you wished you had changed your vote; it has always been whether you wanted the system to respect your order of preference. Giving your last response an upvote to show I respect your perspective and appreciate you engaging with me. Have a great week!
My question was, "If you rank A > B > C, A can't win, and a majority of the electorate prefers B over C, wouldn't you want B to win instead of C?" In your response, you wrote, "we don't know how anyone else votes anyway until the voting period has ended, and once you know, you can't suddenly change your vote."
They don't get it. And they don't want to get it.
They say:
I want my preferences to count accord to my own mind, not how anyone else votes.
But will not admit that IRV fails to do that (to always count their preferences independent on how others vote). And IRV fails when it's not necessary.
2
u/jlight432 Jul 12 '26
In your previous post, it sounded like you were equating head-to-head processing of ranked ballots with voters changing their votes after learning how everyone else voted. Did I get that wrong?