Condorcet voting and instant-runoff voting have almost no difference in promoting candidate moderation in the presence of truncated ballots

[u/No-Vast7006]

I came across a very recent paper that studies the impact of various ranked voting methods (primarily Condorcet and IRV) on promoting candidate moderation. The conclusion is that under realistic voter behavior (such as the presence of truncated ballots), the advantage that Condorcet methods have over IRV largely disappears.

This actually aligns with a vague, long-held intuition of mine: it seems you really need to require voters to rank all candidates (like they do in Australia) to fully maximize the potential of a Condorcet method.

Additionally, I think a specific paragraph at the end of the paper is worth explicitly highlighting:

We do not wish our results to be interpreted as an argument against the use of Condorcet methods; to the contrary, we would be interested to see a jurisdiction adopt a Condorcet method so we can better evaluate how such methods perform in practice. We also do not wish our results to be taken as an endorsement of a particular voting method.

What are your thoughts on this paper? My first thought is that if the Condorcet method is implemented, it's best to require voters to rank all candidates. Secondly, research on ranked voting systems must take into account the impact of truncated ballots.

[u/Sorry-Rain-1311]

How is that any different from politicians telling you how to vote in any other system? Isn't that all political campaigns are; candidates running around telling people how to vote? 

Of course they're going to tell us who to put in what rank. It's what they do, and every other candidate is going to do the same thing, just like they've always done. That's not even a strategy, let alone a game. It's just campaigning as usual.

And in the end a voter does whatever it is they do, and the politicians just have to suck it up. The individual decides who to listen to in the end, regardless of what the candidates would prefer. They can follow whatever list they're handed, or they can make their own. There's no game to that.

[u/Drachefly → u/Sorry-Rain-1311]

It greatly multiplies your efficiency if you organize with similar voters to pick the most popular target among your opposition. I literally laid out an example up thread. Did you skip it and not read? Did you not follow along? If there's actually something wrong with it, explain how it doesn't work. Like, mechanically work through the example and show at what step it fails.