election_title: "Favorite betrayal (RCV-IRV) — HONEST: Left voters rank their favorite first, and their WORST wins"

scenario_description: |-
  The plainest form of the favorite-betrayal incentive, the one RCV voters keep asking
  about ("is it smart to rank my favorite second?"). Three candidates on a spectrum:
  Left, Center, Right. 34 voters. The 12 Left voters vote honestly — Left > Center >
  Right. But Center, everyone's second choice and the Condorcet winner, has the FEWEST
  first-choices (9) and is eliminated first; Center's ballots split, and RIGHT wins the
  final 18-16. The Left voters' sincere ballots elected their LEAST-favorite candidate.
  See the companion fb_irv_betray (2 of those Left voters rank Center first and Center
  wins) and fb_star_honest (STAR/Ranked Robin elect Center from these same honest
  preferences — no betrayal needed). Concept: favorite_betrayal_voting_301.md.

video_script: |-
  Twelve Left voters, all honest: Left first, Center second, Right last. Center is the
  compromise everyone can live with — and beats both wings head-to-head. But under
  instant-runoff, first-choices decide who's cut, and Center has the fewest. Center is
  out; Right wins 18-16. The Left voters got their worst outcome by voting sincerely.
  That is the trap the next file escapes — by betraying the favorite.

paradoxes: [condorcet-winner]
voting_method: RCV_IRV
num_winners: 1

bv_test_id: BV2227
bv_election_id: 3xgkck
bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/3xgkck/results

ballots: |-
  12:Left>Center>Right
  5:Center>Right>Left
  4:Center>Left>Right
  13:Right>Center>Left

expected_winners:
  - Right

# file: fb_irv_honest.yaml