I think this applies to your subsequent posting as well;
Why a quota? Isn't the point of these proxy systems that the whole quota
thing is unneccessary (ie, keep eliminating & distributing 'till N
candidates left)?
To make the ballot papers simpler, could you not have limited (optional)
preferences instead of YES/NO, with some kind of instruction 'Write "1" next
to your preferred candidate, continue numbering candidates (2,3,4), but
number ONLY those candidates whom you consider appropriate for election' ?
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, 15 October 2000 12:26
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [EM] Approval- Cumulative Votes p.r. methods
An Approval-Cumulative Votes variant for p.r. elections (to speed up getting
winners) -----
Each voter indicates his/her YES choices and numbers his/her choices.
Each voter has P points.
The voter's first choice automatically has P minus Y points (where Y is the
number of YES choices).
Example- P = 10 points
1 A 7
2 B 1
3 C 1
4 D 1
The points are summed for all choices. If a choice gets points equal to a
Hare Quota multiplied by P, then he/she is elected.
Option 1- All points go to a winner on a given ballot. A winner has a
voting
power in the legislative body equal to his/her final votes received.
Option 2- A winner has a voting power in the legislative body equal to
his/her final points received. The points of the other choices on the
ballots
having a winner continue.
The choice with the lowest points is eliminated. Any point(s) for him/her
go
to the earliest ranked choice, if any (including an already elected choice).
Example C is eliminated, A then has 8 points.
If the earliest choice is eliminated, then the point(s) for him/her go to
the
next ranked choice, if any.
A is eliminated, B gets 7 points from A- total 8.
Fractions would not be used, if the number of YES choices is limited to P.
A more complex method would permit variable points for the various choices-
Example-
A 5
B 3
C 1
D 1
More YES choices might be permitted but with only the first P (or fewer)
choices getting points.
As usual, I question how many choices are needed (even for multiple factions
within a political party) to get the winners in real p.r. elections.
The above would be somewhat NOT accurate for single winner elections for
executive and judicial offices if a majority YES is required for each
winner.
However points on an absolute scale would give some idea of the support for
each winner. E.G.-- If a simple Approval winner for an executive office got
a
bare majority with 6 point votes only (on a 0 to 10 scale), then it might
reduce the monarchial - legislative tendencies in such winner. Currently e
ach winner for any office acts like each vote for him or her is a 10 vote
(giving him or her an alleged mandate to do whatever).
The same scale voting (making the process a little more complex) technically
can be done with candidates for legislative bodies (to give some idea of the
*absolute* support for each party and/or each party candidate voted for).
