Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

IRV non-monotonicity number is a lower bound #19

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: gh-pages
Choose a base branch
from
+2 −2
Open

IRV non-monotonicity number is a lower bound #19

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions essay/essay.md
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -129,7 +129,7 @@ What happened? At first, (Hexagon) is eliminated in the first round, so (Triangl

Under Instant Runoff, it's possible for a winning candidate to lose, *by becoming more popular*. What a glitch.

How often does this happen in real life? [There are a couple examples](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotonicity_criterion#Real-life_monotonicity_violations), and [mathematicians estimate this glitch would happen about 14.5% of the time](http://www.rangevoting.org/Monotone.html). But sadly, we can't know for sure, because governments usually *don't even release enough info about the ballots* to reconstruct an IRV election, and double-check the results.
How often does this happen in real life? [There are a couple examples](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monotonicity_criterion#Real-life_monotonicity_violations), and [mathematicians estimate this glitch would happen at least 15% of the time](http://www.rangevoting.org/Monotone.html). But sadly, we can't know for sure, because governments usually *don't even release enough info about the ballots* to reconstruct an IRV election, and double-check the results.

So, not only is Instant Runoff's glitch as undemocratic as First Past The Post's glitch, it's possibly *worse* – because while FPTP's counting method is simple and transparent, Instant Runoff is anything but. And a lack of transparency is even deadlier nowadays, when our trust in government is already so low.

@@ -221,4 +221,4 @@ This is about trying to build a better *democracy*.

---

What can you do? Educators, translators, blah blah blah
What can you do? Educators, translators, blah blah blah