On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 10:08 AM, Raph Frank wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Terry Bouricius
> wrote:
>> Why would one want to have voters be restricted by the list order of one's
>> favorite candidate, instead of allowing the voters themselves to reorder
>> the party list (as happens w
Ok, a slight restatement, which makes the operation less complex.
Also, it eliminates the need for a transition from the standard
process to the tie-breaking rule.
Sort conditions by
(total support)/(2*number of seats - 1)
i.e. Sainte-lague divisors
So,
if (ABC)>(all others) has a support of 2
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 1:46 PM, Terry Bouricius
wrote:
> Why would one want to have voters be restricted by the list order of one's
> favorite candidate, instead of allowing the voters themselves to reorder
> the party list (as happens with OPEN list systems - unlike closed party
> list PR)?
Ope
Why would one want to have voters be restricted by the list order of one's
favorite candidate, instead of allowing the voters themselves to reorder
the party list (as happens with OPEN list systems - unlike closed party
list PR)? Is the idea to allow candidates to list candidates outside their
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Kathy Dopp wrote:
> Yikes Raph. I didn't know that the method was potentially
> nonmonotonic. I oppose all nonmonotonic methods.
Yeah, I know. I brought it up in the interests of honesty.
However, there is another thread titled "A monotonic proportional
multiwi
Raph Frank wrote:
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 12:04 AM, Terry Bouricius
wrote:
Ralph is describing the open list system used in such places as the
Netherlands (nation-wide) and Finland (regionally).
I was thinking of a system with 1 list per candidate, rather than 1
list per party. This gives th
Yikes Raph. I didn't know that the method was potentially
nonmonotonic. I oppose all nonmonotonic methods.
I would think that you could simple set a threshold number of votes to
win a seat and then redistribute all excess votes for candidates to
the 1st candidates on their own lists, then redistr
