I don't know what you mean by it doesn't have to. it objectively doesn't but that's a major flaw of that system. not to mention it being complicated and inaccurate. some analysis we wrote in November 2006. www.rangevoting.org/AusIRV

i think approval wins for its sheer simplicity and for not being notably worse than alternatives tbh

The best votes are honest ("your favourite frontrunner and all the better ones" is a very sensible sentiment) and the most honest votes are good

not quite. I've elaborated on this here with Warren Smith, a Princeton math PhD was arguably the world's top expert on voting theory. www.rangevoting.org/RVstrat6

my co-author there took his phd under John Horton Conway, who invented the game of life.

no, it wins for being incredibly accurate and resistant to strategy, and also being precinct summable so it helps escape duopoly. The simplicity is just icing on the cake.

"no," then a bunch of agreements with what he said

a bunch of disagreements. You're confused.