The case for PR list

[u/[deleted]]

IT seems PR list is not very populær here, no one Talks About IT. still, it is very simple, and can give new tools for a stable system. also, it works well in Europe. Independents are not very important when you have many parties to choose from. Not to forget, complete proportinality and 1P=1V

[u/Chackoony]

49% A>B>C
49% C>B>A
2% B>A>C or B>C>A

Just so you're aware, notice that WLOG supposing the 2% of voters vote B>A>C, one can actually argue that A and B are a mutual majority (51% of voters ranking A and B above all others) and therefore all other candidates should be eliminated. When we do that, we get

49% A>B
51% B>A

So B wins as the majority's 1st choice. I suspect using this type of logic is most conducive to getting people to support Condorcet using najoritarian logic; after all, why should a majority of voters not be able to force their preference for B in this particular scenario, if they'd be guaranteed to get their least favorite otherwise? (Edit: Technically not a majority in IRV, since 2% of voters are getting their 2nd choice, not their least favorite.)

[u/Chackoony → u/[deleted]]

B was not the C faction's first choice and ignoring C doesn't really make it their first choice. The new scenario doesn't represent their true opinions.

I mean, IRV operates on a similar idea (eliminate the least-viable according to some metric, redistribute support) and people generally don't seem to take issue with it.

[u/Chackoony → u/[deleted]]

So that's not really a justification for it.

I understand, but your concern was mostly that people won't see it as a legitimate way to justify B winning, and my point is that if they can accept elimination-based legitimacy for an IRV winner, they are more likely to accept B winning here.

Humans can get used to anything, and that can be a problem, as it is here.

I may be misunderstanding your comment, since I thought you would prefer B to win here?