> This is really sad.  Ironically, they were attacked by both the pro-RCV camp (who view it as competition) and the anti-RCV camp (who view it as a variation of RCV), I don't view it as a variation of Hare, except it *does* have two rounds, the latter with the same rules as IRV.It's that a close 3-way race can also cause STAR to fail to elect the Condorcet winner and then all of the bad IIA and Favorite Betrayal and Monotonity stuff follows.So I don't think it's necessarily better than IRV, and STAR still inherently suffers from the burden of tactical for voters whenever there are 3 or more candidates.  As with any Cardinal methods, including Approval.It should be ranked ballots and it should elect the Condorcet winner whenever such exists.>and the Eugene Weekly recommended voting No despite promoting STAR themselves several years prior. 😩 <shrug>

> > So I don't think it's necessarily better than IRV, and STAR still > inherently suffers from the burden of tactical for voters whenever there > are 3 or more candidates. As with any Cardinal method s, including > Approval. And as with every ranked voting method, by Gibbard's theorem. The only difference is every pure cardinal method (not including STAR) doesn't suffer from the burden of dishonest (order-reversal) voting in the 3-candidate case, because they pass FBC and later-no-help. Meanwhile, every defeat-dropping Condorcet method based on wv or margins has a turkey-election as a potential strategic equilibrium. On Wed, May 22, 2024 at 1:42 PM robert bristow-johnson < rbj@audioimagination.com> wrote: > > > > > This is really sad. Ironically, they were attacked by both the pro-RCV > camp (who view it as competition) and the anti-RCV camp (who view it as a > variation of RCV), > > I don't view it as a variation of Hare, except it *does* have two rounds, > the latter with the same rules as IRV. > > It's that a close 3-way race can also cause STAR to fail to elect the > Condorcet winner and then all of the bad IIA and Favorite Betrayal and > Monotonity stuff follows. > > So I don't think it's necessarily better than IRV, and STAR still > inherently suffers from the burden of tactical for voters whenever there > are 3 or more candidates. As with any Cardinal method s, including > Approval. > > It should be ranked ballots and it should elect the Condorcet winner > whenever such exists. > > >and the Eugene Weekly recommended voting No despite promoting STAR > themselves several years prior. 😩 > > <shrug> > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list > info >