--- On Sun, 3/5/09, Raph Frank <raph...@gmail.com> wrote: > I think a candidate list system is better though as it > allows more > general inheritance ordering. Ofc, it is always going > to be a > tradeoff between precision and complexity (both for the > count and for > the voter). > > Closed party list > Open party list > Tree based lists > Candidate list > PR-STV
Yes. In the above list the order of inheritance moves from a party centric model to a vote centric model. Party, candidate and voter impact is different in each case (and may vary also within the categories). > Party list would allow a much smaller ballot. In some sense I'd be happy with a system where "lazy" voters may just point out one candidate (or even party) while voters with more specific needs could cast more detailed votes (e.g. rank the candidates within a grouping or just pick some random individuals). > > Yes. One could try to limit the number of > > candidates to keep voting easy from the > > voter point of view and to keep the size > > of the ballots sheets manageable. > > I think a reasonable compromise here would be to allow > candidates to > register as official write-in candidates. They could > be given a code, > and included on a list in the polling station. One related topic: When the number of candidates grows it is possible to switch to codes only. In the Finnish open list system ballots are very simple. One just writes the number of the candidate on a sheet of paper. It would be possible to do also rankings, maybe including party/group codes this way. Maybe with some fixed small number of slots in the ballot would be enough. One has to write the numbers but on the other hand there is no limit to the number of candidates. Ballots are simple. > Also, candidates might form the tree based on geography > rather than > ideology. Ofc, that would depend on what issues the > voters think are > important. I tend to see geographical districts as one form of proportionality. In addition to ideological proportionality requirements there may be regional proportionality requirements. In a way people living in district X are forced to vote for the district X candidates. (Typically the proportions are determined based on number of citizens, not voters.) (There could be also other simultaneous proportionality requirements like sex, ethnicity, age, religion or occupation related. They could be mandated opinions (like in the regional case) or voluntary (like in the ideological case). And it is possible to force many proportionalities to be exact at the same time (unlike in typical current systems where the regional proportionality is exact and the ideological proportionality is less exact because ideological allocation is counted separately at each district).) Juho ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info