News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Alameda County admits tallying error in ranked choice vot... by scaredginger on Saturday December 31, 2022 @03:52AM (#34194776)
Nah, let's say there are 3 candidates: A, B and C.

A wins a plurality of first preference votes. Otherwise, voters are split between B and C. We assume that if a candidate places C as their first preference, they will place B as their second preference, and vice-versa.

In this scenario, whoever gets more first preference votes out of B and C will win the election since the other will place third and get knocked out of the race, so anybody who placed A as their first preference didn't get to express whether they'd prefer B or C.

If it wasn't obvious,

A: LNP

B/C: Labor/Greens

https://www.abc.net.au/news/elections/federal/2022/guide/bri...

Re:Alameda County admits tallying error in ranked choice vot... by lotsofpulp on Saturday December 31, 2022 @06:14AM (#34195397)
Is it known that B/C voters strategically voted to knock out A?
Re:Alameda County admits tallying error in ranked choice vot... by scaredginger on Saturday December 31, 2022 @07:41AM (#34195940)
B and C voters aren't strategic here. If they wish to knock out A, then placing A at the bottom would not be strategic voting.

The point is that A voters arguably should have voted such that they could influence which of these two candidates won. This would require 'lying' about which candidate is their favourite; i.e. strategic voting