On 08-Sep-1998, Emery Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I personally lean towards Haskell 98 myself, but just for
> grins (and to hopefully offload this topic from the list):
> =====
> STRAW POLL
> Send to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject "Straw Poll".
> Results will be tabulated and announced on September 15, 1998.
>
> Assuming that the Haskell standard will be announced in 1998,
> I'd prefer that the language specification be called...
> (pick ONE of the following):
...
> Reason for your vote:
If you're going to have a poll, it would be better to let everyone
list their order of preferences, rather than just their first
preference. Voting systems based on a single non-transferable
vote are fundamentally flawed (see the quote below, from information on
the Proportional Representation Society of Australia home page
<http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/pr.html>).
Software for computing a winner from a preferential votes using the
Quota Preferential method is available at
<http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/count/count_form.html>.
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
--------------------
Marking X is not sufficient
If voters only indicate their first preference there is simply not
enough information for a good selection of representatives. Votes may
be split across several candidates with similar views, leading to all
those candidates losing while another candidate with opposing views
wins with fewer votes in total. Votes for candidates who are not
successful must be wasted since there is no indication of the voter's
second and subsequent preferences. Systems that lead to votes being
wasted encourage insincere voting: rather than waste a vote on the
genuine first preference who may be unlikely to be elected, the vote is
cast for a lower preference who has a chance of getting elected. Often
this results in people voting for the "lesser of two evils" and makes
it very difficult for smaller parties to gain ground. Systems based on
marking multiple X's do not solve the problem and sometimes make things
even worse.
--------------------
See also Tom Round's thesis
"A matter of preference? Defending the Single Transferable Vote";
<http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~lee/prsa/tround/>
--------------------
