LNH Wikipedia article is blatantly false

[Clay Shentrup]

Voting systems that don't satisfy the later-no-harm criterion encourage the tactical voting strategy called bullet voting, which can lead to sub-optimal election outcomes.

Someone should contest this.

[Clay Shentrup]

This was a recent edit:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Later-no-harm_criterion&diff=prev&oldid=814183319

We should contest this hard.

[NoIRV]

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:56:44 AM UTC-5, Clay Shentrup wrote:
> Voting systems that don't satisfy the later-no-harm criterion encourage the tactical voting strategy called bullet voting, which can lead to sub-optimal election outcomes.
>
> Someone should contest this.

I think it should say "voting systems that do not satisfy the later no harm criterion can be susceptible to the voting strategy called bullet voting, which means that voters will rank only their first choice in ordinal systems, or some equivalent in cardinal systems."

Perhaps the guy who made the edit is an IRV propagandist?

[Lonán Dubh]

...Under the heading of "Do Something," I think part of the reason that Range isn't gaining as much traction as IRV is is that we spend so much time responding to PropagandaName's narrative, and not pushing our own.  This is one example of that, but another is the fact that there is no page for "No Favorite Betrayal" Criterion on Wikipedia, or the difference in how developed the IRV page is compared to the Range Voting page.  We need to fix that, educating people on Range on our own terms, rather than theirs.

After all, attempting to subvert PropagandaName won't work, so why not emulate their successes?  Figure out what they're doing, and use the same tactics to our advantage, and allow the fact that our system is both better (Bayesian Regret, VSE) and simpler beat them.

If we can build up the pages showing the benefits of Range, the problems of Favorite Betrayal, we can start to control the message, forcing them to go on the defensive for once, rather than having to point out why their "But Approval Voting!" is a strawman.

I'm going to try to flesh out the Range Voting page.  Who wants to build the "No Favorite Betrayal" Criterion page?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "The Center for Election Science" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to electionscience+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.