election_title: "Exercise 10 — Later-no-harm: the generous ballots"
bv_test_id: BV2196
bv_election_id: yyhj9x
bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/yyhj9x/results

scenario_description: |-
  The same nine voters as ex10_reticent.yaml, but Amir's four fans now
  score honestly: Amir 5, Bess 3, Cato 0 — they genuinely like Bess
  second. Those twelve extra points lift Bess from 13 to 25: scoring
  round Bess 25, Amir 24, Cato 15 — and Bess beats Amir in the runoff
  5-4. The fans' generosity cost their favorite the win: a LATER-NO-HARM
  failure, live. The counter-reading: Bess is this electorate's Condorcet
  winner (beats Amir 5-4, Cato 6-3) and is scored 1+ by all nine voters —
  the reticent ballots didn't protect Amir so much as HIDE Bess. STAR
  gives up later-no-harm on purpose: protecting favorites by hiding
  compromises is exactly what it declines to reward. Exercise:
  ex10_later_no_harm.md. Ballots and cast are this repo's own.
  Live on BetterVoting (Test ID BV2196): https://bettervoting.com/yyhj9x/results
  — with an RCV-IRV race (still Amir: IRV keeps later-no-harm precisely
  by center-squeezing the Condorcet winner Bess).
voting_method: STAR
num_winners: 1
ballots: |-
  Amir,Bess,Cato
  5,3,0 # 4 voters: Amir fans, honest about liking Bess second
  5,3,0
  5,3,0
  5,3,0
  2,5,0 # 2 voters: Bess first, mild nod to Amir — unchanged
  2,5,0
  0,1,5 # 3 voters: Cato first, a token point to Bess — unchanged
  0,1,5
  0,1,5
expected_winners:
  - Bess

# file: ex10_generous.yaml