Its CES’s policy to advocate for any alternatives ate voting methods that is an improvement on the current status quo. IRV may not be optimal but it’s better than single choice voting.
But the redirect is fitting… IRV is sort of “unfair” for third parties and independents. I think whoever said that UnfairVote is leftist may be correct. From what I can tell, IRV will benefit the Democratic Party.
Speaking as a leftist, I would not want to benefit the “Democratic” Party.
Richie said he prefers that the full details not be released , in part so that candidates who lose don’t parse all the results in search of an argument that they should have won.
"I’ve come to believe we shouldn’t put all the rankings out there for people to mull over and second-guess the outcomes," he said.
That’s pretty damning.
While there are many legitimate arguments against publishing the full ranking (https://www.rangevoting.org/IRVpubGotcha.html), Richie sounds like someone who has something to hide and is taking desperate measures to prevent the public from finding out, when he could just back STAR voting instead and then he could be honest and want the election to be public…
If only some particular people were logical in their decisions…
EDIT: But can you link to the source?
It was from the instant runoff Blogspot link you posted. (Which in turn got it from a WSJ article.)
Quoting user “jimrtex4192” from Yahoo:
Farivote has quite a bit of information on their web site. In 2016 they spent about $3 million, including $1.5 million in salaries. They list the salary of persons who are also board members. They list a salary of just over $100,000 for Rob Ritchie who is the executive director, and $50,000 for a secretary.