[EM] Unicameral single-member + PR in Germany (Re: CompetitiveDistricting Rule)

[James Gilmour]

Stephane
OK, but the onus is on you to find and define some new terminology for
the situation you describe.

The common meaning of "single-member district" as "a district
represented by only one member elected by a single-winner voting system"
is so well established that it would be unreasonable, in my view, to
require everyone worldwide now to have to write "single-winner
single-member district" where they currently write "single-member
district".  This accepted meaning of "single-member district" applies
even in hybrid voting systems like MMP.

James

> 
> Sorry but no, I am definitively not playing with words.
> I am just making sure that the terminology used, leaves
> some way to describe SPPA. Call it the way you want,
> but make sure people understand that a single-runner method
> can have multiple-winners if the voters of each districts are 
> considered equivalent samples of the electorate. Thus instead 
> of electing a loser with 10% of the vote in a specific 
> district as proposes Juho, it seems fair to elect instead 
> another loser from the same party with 49% in a district that 
> already has one winner. Simulation I made using both these 
> systems (Juho and mine) showed an approbational rate almost 
> double with SPPA instead of Juho's system.
> 
> James Gilmour a écrit :
> 
> > Stephane a écrit :
> > > It is possible to achieve PR with single-member districts if by 
> > > single-member district it means only one representative of any 
> > > political can be candidate. This unclassical definition does not
say 
> > > that there will be only one winner. There could be several or even

> > > none.
> >
> > Stephane, this is just playing with words!    By "single-member
> > district" the world of electoral science means and understands "a 
> > district electing one single member" to multi-member body, like a
city 
> > council or state legislature.  The term is used to distinguish this 
> > type of election from a "single winner election" where there is only

> > one post to fill, like a city mayor or a state governor.  Any other 
> > "definitions" are unhelpful and just create confusion where none
need 
> > exist.
> >
> > So my statement stands:
> > > James Gilmour a écrit :
> > > > My statement related to voting systems based on "single-member 
> > > > districts" and it is correct that if you have only single-member

> > > > districts you cannot have PR (except by chance).
> >
> > James