Erratic Results and Non-Erractic Results

[Olli Salmi]

No, we wouldn't of course change the tally during the electio. I'm sorry I
didn't make that clear. However, I would expect that if the total number of
seats were increased, no party would lose seats.

I checked what the D'Hondt and Sainte Lague results would be for these
figures. It's 8,6,3, and 2 for both. Is it sure that Hare doesn't give
unfair advantage to small parties?

Olli Salmi

At 15:19 +0300 26.4.1998, New Democracy wrote:
>Party   Votes   19 Seat             20 Seat               Differences
>                Quotient   Seats   Quotient   Seats    Quotient  Seats
>  A      550      7.26       7       7.64       8        .38      +1
>  B      470      6.20       6       6.53       7        .33      +1
>  C      250      3.30       4       3.47       3        .17      -1
>  D      170      2.24       2       2.36       2        .12       0
>
>Donald writes:
>     Why would we be increasing the number of seats during the tally? If
>the number of seats in a legislature are changed, the election becomes a
>new ballgame - the resultant numbers are going to be different. We must
>accept the new results.