The Atlantic has this article about Maine and ranked-choice voting in the 2018 election. There is no big news revealed the article, but the article’s details about what has been happening are interesting and fair to both sides.
The article is wrong to say that ranked-choice voting has never been used in a statewide election. It was used in a few southern states in the 1910’s decade for Democratic Party primaries.
The love of the one party system in SF is unacceptable and the United Coalition’s team has been demonstrating the correct use of RCV online since 1994 but those asking for a one party system like in SF is unacceptable.
The United Coalition’s conversation had been bringing pure proportional representation (PPR) for more than twenty-three consecutive years and PPR works fine by prohibiting single winners in SF, Maine and everywhere but those promoting such winner-takes-all voting like SF and Maine had destroyed/delayed progress for the whole. Why? Being in SF, are you working on the fruits of your work attain RCV now in SF’s one party system, by delaying competition and equal treatment for 2nd and 3rd largest civic groups in SF?
http://www.international-parliament.org/ucc.html
Condorcet = Number Votes done correctly — with AppV tiebreaker.
@Joogle,
San Francisco voted down the use of STV. During the campaign to implement IRV several years later, proponent FAQs asked:
Q: Didn’t San Francisco vote this down a few years ago?
A: That was something entirely different.
Q: Where is IRV used?
A: In Australia and Ireland and Cambridge, Massachusetts.
https://www.york.cuny.edu/~malk/modeling/election-methods.html
have headache medicine if you do not have a math brain.
PR and AppV — pending Condorcet
RCV/IRV FATAL defects Apr 2018
RCV/IRV ignores most of the data in a Place Votes Table.
The *Middle* is divided – as usual.
34 A-M-Z
33 Z-M-A
16 M-A-Z
16 M-Z-A
99
With RCV/IRV, M loses. A beats Z 50-49.
A = Stalin, M = Washington, Z = Hitler
—————
Place Votes Table
— 1 — 2 — 3 — T
A 34 – 16 – 49 – 99
Z 33 – 16 – 50 – 99
M 32 – 67 – 0 – 99
T 99 – 99 – 99
i.e. RCV/IRV will cause even more extremist winners due to rigged majority *mandate* stuff.
M has a mere 99 of 99 votes in 1st and 2nd place.
Also — symmetry — Z has 50 in last place — should lose. M then beats A 65-34.
————
Head to Head (Condorcet) Math – from 1780s — repeat 1780s.
M beats A 65-34
M beats Z 66-33
Condorcet is obviously correct by the math of having a 3rd choice beat each of 2 existing choices head to head.
A > B
C comes along
IF C > A and C > B, THEN C should be winner.
*******
Condorcet math — ALL elections —
legislative, executive, judicial.
ALL combinations of —
Test Winner(s) vs Test Loser — Test Other Losers
Number ranked votes go from TOL to TW or TL.
Would need computer voting to do all the combinations in any *larger* election.
Also– vote YES or NO (default) on each choice for a tie breaker when a TW/TL does not win/lose in all combinations.
For 2 or more exec/judic offices (e.g. 2 judges), the 2 or more top ranked number votes are used in the TW/TL/TOL math.
Legislative body elections — the final Winners would have a Voting Power equal to their final votes (direct from voters plus indirect from Losers).
—-
Thus — Proportional Representation — legis and nonpartisan Approval Voting (YES/NO) exec-judic — pending Condorcet head to head math.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportional_representation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Approval_voting
—
Note – see “mathematics of voting and elections” in a Google search regarding 3 or more choices math.
———-
TOP 2 FANS — SEE THAT TOP EXAMPLE AGAIN.
NO MORE ELECTIONS IF *JUST ENOUGH* STALIN/HITLER CLONE REPTILES GET ELECTED WITH THEIR RIGGED *MANDATES* ???
JR, my estimate in dates as follows:
I learned of RCV in 1992 when running for Santa Cruz City Council as “Env Coalition”, campaigning online.
I ran for Congress (CD 17) in 1993 as Env. Party special election and then Governor of CA, spoke at BAN headquarters in 1994, all campaigning in Usenet, on platform of voting reform through PPR.
Ossipoff and I informed Rob Richie that single-winners under IRV is incorrect in ’94 or 95.
SF adopted IRV in eleven single-winner districts in 2012.
Cambridge MA has been using RCV with STV correctly, one at-large district, for more than 60 years using STV and paper ballots.
Founder of google Sergie Brin, located in Santa Clara, joined my conversation in October 1997 and asked “what is a joogle” (my email/user name in Usenet) and announced the name change from Backrub.com, one week later. They use “page rank” and the co-founder is Larry Paige, but they don’t use PR on their company BoDs. When you use Google, you click “go”, but go is not a number.
Santa Clara City elections are to vote on using RCV, divide the town in two, gerrymandering and doubling the threshold on June 5th, 2018.
FairVote said that IRV was used for primaries in Florida, Indiana, Maryland, and Minnesota. None of these can be considered southern states.
Are you actually claiming that you invented the name “Google” and they stole the idea from you? I mean there’s tin-foil-hat conspiracy theories, and then there’s foaming at the mouth tin-foil-hat Alex Jones level of conspiracy theories.
Brandon, I did the vote count, mailing of blank ballots and statements for CPR in 1994 and our friend Cameron Spritzer, the CA Green Party “internet coordinator” lobbied to have me thrown off because he didn’t like what I did since the party’s official endorsement for Gov was NOTA.
Yes, we worked with Nader before the Green Party invited him to be on their ballot in 1996.
Yes, Spritzer and everyone chatted with Brian, when he announced the name change.
I contacted the SF Chronical newspaper when they interviewed Brin, told the reporter they got the idea for my logo. She asked how he got the name, he admitted he misspelled google, but she not him printed the info from Usenet.. the moment he asked “What I’d a joogle”. Everyone forgot.
For example when I told Winger to confirm with Spritzer he declined. Everyone says I am z liar but I know plenty of personalities who witnessed the moment.
Gary Swing (Colorado Green Congressional), Hank Chapop (Green Party gardener at UCB), likely Igor Chudov (Libertarian), programmer and owner of http://www.algebra.com.
Wow! An actual response from James Ogle that did not invoke his fantasy parliament BS! I AM impressed!
CPR = citizens for proportional representation (John Anderson’s group)
In 1994 when I ran in Green Party primary for Gov, my statement about proportional representation went to every voter in state’s voter pamphlet, but official endorsement for Gov was NOTA.
They put NOTA to snuff out all of the above. Yes, I was defeated by NOTA in 1994.
Yes, we worked with Nader in 1993 about six months before the Green Party invited him to be on their ballot in 1996 and before the campaign was announced in BAN. When he gave me permission to be on USA Parliament’s ballot he wasn’t a candidate for any office, is what they wrote to me in 1994/5.
Yes, Spritzer and everyone chatted with google Sergie Brin, when he announced the name change, Spritzer announced that he got Brin to turn all traffic away from my name and and any similar words so I watched others become successful as “parliamentarians “, but they didn’t use PPR.
I contacted the SF Chronical about “What is a joogle”. Everyone forgot and Google Groups deleted that now. It still exists, but not in Google Groups.
Sergie Brin read:”I don’t know what a joogle is but a google is a number”, when someone replied.
A week later, October of 1997,he announced in my conversation in Usenet, and posted the link to google.com.
But nobody wants you to know about the United Coalition’s influence with google and other ways our info. helps people to improve under PPR.
Do a search for joogle on google !!!
How much stuff on rocks, on paper, on radio, on TV, on internet is long gone ???
—
PR and AppV
Only the party bosses in the Green, Libertarian, etc., every political party, the party bosses are supposed to make sure everyone knows they are smarter than outsiders with new ideas. Google too, doesn’t want anyone to know that their info. is faulty, that they truthfully got the ideas from the United Coalition’s team, they just want Civil Wars to sell adds. They don’t need PPR, just ads around spectacular conflicts to get more as revenues.
But we have a better idea. The unity coalition will be news, we don’t need political ads and google ads.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_system
Various election methods — mostly defective.
updated a mere 3 days ago.
Should be added to the *Useful Info* at BAN top !!!???
DR, when I searched joogle, I got my YouTube video, as a top search. Those were scenes from 1995 when camera man got Marcus Denoon (Pot) when we made the video of his campaign.
Google started in 1997.
We filed for POTUS in 1996. We started the USA Parliament in Usenet in 1995.
At that time the internet was growing 10% a month so one or two years was a very long time in internet growth at the time.
BTW DR, what do you mean by this? Just curious…
“How much stuff on rocks, on paper, on radio, on TV, on internet is long gone ???”
@Joogle,
SF voted to switch to district election of supervisors in 1976. Before there was even an election, supervisors including Dianne Feinstein and Ronald Pelosi supported a repeal attempt. At the time, supervisor elections were in odd-numbered years, just like mayoral and other city offices. District elections were held in 1977 and 1979.
In August 1980, voters approved a switch back to at-large elections of supervisors to take effect in November 1980, short circuiting the terms of the supervisors elected in 1977 and 1979. In effect, it was a stealth recall.
In 1996, SF voted to return to district election of supervisors, which took effect in 1998 and 2000. At the same 1996 election they rejected use of STV.
The election of supervisors in even years continues since the stealth recall in 1980.
JO —
Lots of stuff on the internet is NOT being kept.
Major doubts about computer records in the long term — old 1960s magnetic tape, old floppy disks, even recent disks.
Earlier — lots of stuff on cheap JUNK sulfur acid paper in the 1800s — now totally rotting – literally falling apart if touched.
Need gas mask in law libraries for older court opinions in many States.
Compare with stuff on acid free paper — pre 1800s.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Googol
ANY connection between googol BIG number – and google BIG internet search Biz ???