Donald wrote (in part):
> Second: Your example tells us that you are a man of many
> hats. Today you are wearing your `Political Party' hat.
> Most days you wear your `Independent Candidate' hat (to show
> that you are a champion of the independent candidate).
This analysis might suit Dona
M. Hodges,
"John B. Hodges" a écrit :
> Yesterday I asked about "Generalized Bucklin"/MCA: Voters submit
> ranked ballots, which may include ties, and need not list all
> candidates. First-choice votes are tallied; if any candidates get
> votes from a majority (more than 50%) of the voters, the
At the risk of
repeating myself, my argument against Condorcet can be summarised as
follows:
I do not support Condorcet because I believe that in practice, regardless
of the theoretical and conceptual advantages it may possess, it would be
too favourable towards parties who succeed in positioning
Why the unrealistic example is unrealistic:
40A
35C>B
30B
This example is not realistic because it is extremely unlikely that all the supporters of one party would express a second preference whilst none of the supporters of the two other parties would.
Why this example is not that unrealistic
PostPostscript: Technical nicety. On each round of balloting for the
multiseat-Bucklin procedure, the Droop quotas are calculated AFTER
that round's ballots are tallied and added to any votes carrying over
from previous rounds. DQ = (#votes)/(#seats+1).
I suspect this procedure is going to over
Here's an idea for turning random ballot into a deterministic method that
is equivalent for all practical purposes, but allows checking of the
result by independent parties:
Suppose that there are three candidates and that their respective "random
shares" are proportional to 3:7:9, respectively,
Neal Finne said:
> I'd be reluctant to use any electoral system that requires voters to
> vote strategically. Still, within those systems, approval is a huge
> improvement over plurality or IRV.
There is a theorem (named after its discoverers, Gibbard and
Satterthwaite) which states that no ranked
Yesterday I asked about "Generalized Bucklin"/MCA: Voters submit
ranked ballots, which may include ties, and need not list all
candidates. First-choice votes are tallied; if any candidates get
votes from a majority (more than 50%) of the voters, the one with
the largest majority wins. If none
