Lmao. Actual data is messy, let's use simplified data instead. No dude. That's not how science works. Actual data from actual observations is better than experimental conditions. Specifically because of the human factor.

And you can't make claims like "approval voting means you can vote for several candidates safely!" And then call single candidate ballots a success. They voted tactically. The politicians told them to vote tactically.

And elections offices won't release the ballots but they absolutely release the anonymized data about what votes went where. Which is why I'm astounded you just claimed we don't have data on RCV voting. There's 62 jurisdictions in the US using it. It's been used internationally as far back as 1893. Australia has been using it heavily for 80+ years. Your data is out there. Go find it. I'm not going to attempt to prove a negative because that's impossible. And continuing to ask me to do so is incredibly bad faith.

And if a spoiler causes a change in the winner, then obviously people preferred that candidate over the runner up candidate. You know what would solve that? RCV.

Edit - lol I totally forgot to talk about your source work. I'll leave it with a hearty lol though. You can say you read it all and it was super meticulous if you want but it obviously wasn't.