Hello, I was somewhat active on this mailing list for a short time several years ago. How is everyone doing?
I have an idea for a single-winner election method, and it seems like a good one to me. I'd like to know if it has been considered before and, if so, what the problems are with it, if any. Here's how it works: The mechanics of casting a ballot are identical to what we do now (in the US anyway). Each voter simply votes for one candidate. After the votes are counted, the last-place candidate transfers his or her votes to the candidate of his or her choice. Then the next-to-last candidate does the same thing, and so on, until one candidate has a majority. The transfer of votes at the close of polling could be automated as follows. Weeks before the election, each candidate constructs a ranked list of his or her preferences for the other candidates. The resulting preference matrix could (should?) be published for the voters to see in advance. The bottom candidate at each round of transfers would then have his or her votes automatically transferred to the top remaining candidate in his or her preference list. The transfer of votes from the bottom finisher in each round resembles IRV, but note that this method is "summable" -- a major advantage over IRV, eliminating the need to maintain a record of each and every vote cast. I think it may also have other major strategy-deterring advantages over IRV. What do you think? Thanks. Russ P. -- http://RussP.us
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
