Just to be clear for others: those who reject Ranked Choice Voting do so because it does not support 3rd party candidates - it encourages strategic voting (due to its non-monotonicity) that locks in to 2-parties again. It thus completely fails to achieve the most important part of reform, and falls below ALL other systems previously mentioned here (including also Condorcet or Proportional Representation systems, where applicable). This is not simply "oh some people like Approval voting a little more" - we are dumbfounded by those who prefer Ranked Choice Voting. STRONG negative preference.
It's also worth considering that the same parties who benefit from First Past The Post would be threatened by a change to literally any other system aside from FPTP or Ranked Choice Voting. Surely that comes into play when voting reform movements are funded. And surely that kind of "conspiracy talk" shouldn't be dismissed in an intellectual forum when there is a very clear path to how these reforms could directly affect very powerful parties.
It's also worth considering that the same parties who benefit from First Past The Post would be threatened by a change to literally any other system aside from FPTP or Ranked Choice Voting. Surely that comes into play when voting reform movements are funded. And surely that kind of "conspiracy talk" shouldn't be dismissed in an intellectual forum when there is a very clear path to how these reforms could directly affect very powerful parties.