inb4 "Mike still would have won the second seat." Yes, I know. I ran out of characters. Multi-winner dulls most effects, both negative and positive. It's still a monotonicity failure: https://t.co/POMLSg1Sfq
@EntroperZero @HoldenFWDUSA @Fwd_Party Careful, you might end up in one of those non-monotonic RCV/IRV elections where your lower ranking of Approval helps Approval to win! https://t.co/kAtmTYvPho https://t.co/kpStA5IR25
@ChaseForLiberty @python_choke @angela4LNCChair This is known as nonmonotonicity and it is shown to happen in 15% of RCV elections with three viable candidates. That percentage goes up as more viable candidates are added. 6/ https://t.co/kAtmTYvPho
@pro_oregon @TheEqualVote @sfchronicle True, but IRV fails a significant percentage of the time. https://t.co/kAtmTYvPho
@p_ferragu There is a bit of research on IRV and other voting methods, but we could stand to see more. https://t.co/ITpTZXl7NC
Largely correct. In ranked choice voting (IRV), "increasing support for a candidate among a subset of voters may adversely affect that candidate’s election outcome" "results suggest a lower bound estimate of 15 % for competitive elections". https://t.co
@TransOffender yeah, this situation probably wouldn't happen but also, IRV has legit monotonicity issues where it's possible for your vote to do the opposite of what you want, which is one of the many reasons I much prefer Approval Voting https://t.co/KT
@mrsjtweetsmath @justinamash Especially since RCV requires centralized tabulation, making it more vulnerable to fraud or mistakes than a good summable voting method like STAR voting or Approval voting. RCV is made worse by the fact that it doesn't actuall
@shigginb This study found that increasing support for a candidate among a subset of voters may adversely affect that candidate's outcome 15% of the time or more in IRV (Ranked Choice). https://t.co/kAtmTYMSjo https://t.co/t8OdkLdObs
RT @Annie_Kallen: @Fwd_Party @SpenReynolds Ranking is easy. What's hard is explaining how in RCV/ IRV ranking your favorite candidate first…
RT @Annie_Kallen: @Fwd_Party @SpenReynolds Ranking is easy. What's hard is explaining how in RCV/ IRV ranking your favorite candidate first…
@Fwd_Party @SpenReynolds Ranking is easy. What's hard is explaining how in RCV/ IRV ranking your favorite candidate first can backfire. Instead of replacing one broken voting method with another, can we go to STAR voting or Approval voting, where all ball
@ImpactDemocracy @representus @5starvoting Last but not least, here is a study of the rate at which voting backfires in RCV/ IRV. Note that failures happen when there are 3 or more competitive candidates. https://t.co/kAtmTYMSjo https://t.co/x9s1bR2t34
@vemcg @fairvote This study examines the phenomenon. (IRV is the technical name for RCV). https://t.co/kAtmTYMSjo
@AndrewYang In RCV (aka IRV), your vote can backfire: https://t.co/kAtmTYMSjo
@AndrewW45837485 @ClayShentrup @riskyappetite @AndrewYang All of the studies I have seen point to score-based systems (and STAR and Approval in particular) being superior to RCV/ IRV. Here are some links you might find interesting: https://t.co/fyQtqnvsNF
@MartinTruther @MagsMagnoli @RJohnston815 RCV (aka IRV) is commonly pitched as solving the spoiler effect, but actually it's just that the spoiler effect is hidden within a complex process. It does mitigate spoilers, but doesn't eliminate them. https://t.
@veritasium St. Louis just used Approval voting, and there is also a lot of traction around STAR voting. Unlike IRV, both of those methods are monotonic. https://t.co/pIsnAIkWbj
@TimothyLiptrot @ClayShentrup @ClayShentrup can be exasperating, but he's usually right. It's annoying, like talking to my parents. :) The evidence is consistent that cardinal voting methods really are superior to IRV. https://t.co/i0TjGi4Gvv https://t.c
@AdamPrincePHL It's not that rare either. According to this study, it occurs in at minimum 15% of close 3-way elections: https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ
RT @5starvoting: @AndrewYang We hope that the winner on June 22 accurately reflects the voters' will. Ranked choice (instant runoff voting)…
@AndrewYang We hope that the winner on June 22 accurately reflects the voters' will. Ranked choice (instant runoff voting) is better than choose-one-only voting, so we're hopeful. However, this race has 3 viable candidates, which is a scenario where IRV ca
RT @Nywoe: How much do you know about ranked choice voting (IRV)? Do you know about monotonicity failure? https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ People…
RT @Nywoe: How much do you know about ranked choice voting (IRV)? Do you know about monotonicity failure? https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ People…
How much do you know about ranked choice voting (IRV)? Do you know about monotonicity failure? https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ People are starting to realize that better methods (STAR voting and Approval voting for example) exist. Let's get this right the first
@LibertarianCT @PaperworkKing @GreenPartyUS @LPNational @allianceparty @CPNational @ConParty It's a mathematical fact that RCV has a harder time with this the more candidates there are in a race. https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ
@TheShawnG @NANReformers It's magic all right. All misdirection and smoke and mirrors. This is a great metaphor for how opaque ranked choice/ instant runoff voting is. There are better, more transparent options like STAR voting and Approval voting! https:/
@YangDailyCast @clanceyandrew @RankedChoiceNY The truth is we don't know how rare it is since most RCV elections do not publish all the ballot data. But one study says RCV would have monotonicity failures in 15% of 3-way competitive elections, and more wit
@d_f_stone @ClashIrony @Antagonist @ElectionScience @Edsall @aaronfhamlin @jennifernvictor @5starvoting Here is a paper discussing nonmonotonicity in IRV: https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ
@emnode @GrampsWasAntifa @BluthBananacart @AndrewYang Yeah, 15% (or more!) of competitive races is way to many. https://t.co/pIsnAI3kMJ
As you know, we love your org and we love UnRigTheSystem, but in Burlington VT almost a full 1/3 of voters had their 1st choice (who they knew couldn't win) knock their 2nd choice out of the running, electing their last choice... https://t.co/HigmdhVe7F ht
@Cahen93 https://t.co/ITpTZX2Yzu https://t.co/CLIMEEnyyL https://t.co/4lt3swWtUj Note: The technical name for Ranked Choice Voting is Instant Runoff Voting.
Source for the 15% rate of non-monotonicity: https://t.co/RJvs9gAzzQ