On Apr 7, 2007, at 0:34 , James Gilmour wrote:
> Juho> Sent: 06 April 2007 22:25
>> Also, to give more power directly to the voters, while maintaining an
>> easy way to vote, easy understanding of what the candidates stand
>> for, and with accountability.
>
> If that is what you want, why not just
At 05:25 PM 4/6/2007, Juho wrote:
>>Is Juho aware of the use of Asset Voting that I have proposed? It
>>seems far simpler and more flexible than what Juho has proposed,
>>with similar effect.
>
>Yes I'm aware of Asset Voting. There are similarities but also lots
>of differences. Maybe the biggest
Dear all,
Im new to the Electorama list and also a begginer to voting methods. I would
like some guidance from the list on how to guess the results of an election,
that recently took place in my country, if different voting procedures, other
than Plurality, were used. The story follows.
The p
For practical purposes any method based on rankings or range style
ballots, can be closely approximated by a summable version. Since
approval cutoffs can be incorporated into rankings and ratings, methods
that require approval cutoffs can also be efficiently accomodated.
It's based on the idea
Juho> Sent: 06 April 2007 22:25
> Also, to give more power directly to the voters, while maintaining an
> easy way to vote, easy understanding of what the candidates stand
> for, and with accountability.
If that is what you want, why not just use STV-PR?
Then there would be no party-controlled
On Apr 6, 2007, at 19:17 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:
At 09:52 AM 4/6/2007, Juho wrote:
Here's one method for PR multi-winner elections. [...]
Candidates (or parties) are free to form any kind groups. Some
typical groups are parties and regions. The groups are allowed to be
hierarchical and to
At 09:52 AM 4/6/2007, Juho wrote:
>Here's one method for PR multi-winner elections. [...]
>
>Candidates (or parties) are free to form any kind groups. Some
>typical groups are parties and regions. The groups are allowed to be
>hierarchical and to overlap. Also mandatory groups can be covered
>withi
- Four groups: L=Left, R=Right, N=North, S=South
- Four candidates (or smaller groups): LN, RN, LS, RS
- LN belongs to L and N, and similarly RN, LS and RS and belong to
corresponding L, R, N and S groups
- Votes: LN:30, RN:30, LS:30, RS:10
Case 1: One candidate elected
- L gets more votes than
Here's one method for PR multi-winner elections. This is to some
extent a derivation of tree based methods that I have discussed
earlier, but since this one has also interesting use cases with flat
structures, and tree based inheritance of votes is not explicitly
used in the calculation pro
