Official pamphlet (pdf)
given to San Francisco voters for referendum
to enact Instant Runoff Voting (passed, 5 March 2002, by 55-45 margin).
The IRV refendum wording is on page 37 and is 1 sentence long, and
that sentence contains a lie. There is also a long
disussion of pro and con arguments about it pages 37-45, plus official legal wording on
BBC study: what would have happened in Britain with IRV?
based on BBC poll data indicates that IRV usually would have wrongly
made the LibDems finish 3rd whereas they should have been 2nd... plurality system
UK actually used yielded even stronger distortion.
that was used in the state of Georgia to disenfranchise blacks, until the
federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 put an end to it. (Supplied by Georgia Tech professor
John J. Bartholdi III,
who says one had to achieve a perfect score to register to vote.) Could you pass?
Here are the alleged
Professional poll of 1202 random Australian adults
that they prefer plain-plurality voting versus the preferential (instant runoff)
system they presently use (if forced to choose one) – i.e. they'd like to abandon IRV
– the poll result was 57% to 37% (with 5% don't know/refuse).
Monetized score voting is my name for
an idea advanced in atrocious work by several economists
(2012-2013) and improved/corrected/examined by me.
The idea is by paying to cast your score voting ballot according to
certain carefully designed price formulas, you will become inspired by the
profit motive to vote honestly. Unfortunately this disregards some massive
real world problems, but perhaps might be ok in some corporate votes and also
(if the whole max-profit-motive-theorem is abandoned instead merely
seeking to discourage exaggeration in range voting)
as modified by us even perhaps in governmental ones.
Range Voting Election held in combined 3 kindergarten classes
at Lowell School (Maryland)
by Alan Sherman, 29 April 2010, on question "what is your favorite pet"?
[Also discussed was "scantegrity II" fraud-proof voting techniques, in all it took 30 minutes.]