>To break the backs of the parties, though, for that you need a
>monotonic, cloneproof, condorcet balloting method like Schulze or
>Tideman. IRV is not the answer, and the reasons are mathematical, and
>therefore shouldn't be doubted.
I doubt.
I recall looking into the condorcet system once, can't recall the details exactly, but I recall thinking it was a dodgy sham proportion representation system designed to avoid a PR outcome. One of many. Explain why I'm wrong.
What the fuck is IRV and why are you spouting acronyms without bothering to define them? Are you trying to suggest that only dumb people wouldn't know what IRV is?
Bill Bartlett Bracknell Tas