[EM] Why the Droop Quota is wrong

[David Catchpole]

I'll just rebut that with the Hare quota, the more organised large blocs
will deliberately keep their first preference votes for individual
candidates just above a Droop quota and then go on to their next
candidate, while smaller less organised blocs which happen to have support
above a Hare quota will be disadvantaged by their votes being sponged up
by the idiocy of the unequal, unrealistic, unjustifiable Hare quota.

A good example of how the Droop quota makes infinitely more sense than the
Hare quota is the "rally in a park" example given by Hallet and Hoag.

Even Hare liked the Droop quota more than the Hare quota.

On Thu, 14 Oct 1999, Donald E Davison wrote:

> Greetings,
> 
>      I would like to add to this Droop discussion by saying what is exactly
> wrong with the Droop Quota.
> 
>      When we have a candidate with a surplus of votes, most of that surplus
> will be transferred to a second candidate of the same party.
>      Now, if some creative mathematics can be used to increase the amount
> of surplus, then the second candidate will be helped with an additional
> number of votes. These extra votes can make the difference between winning
> and losing for the second candidate, of the same party of the first
> candidate.
>      The Droop Quota is this creative mathematics that will increase the
> surplus by lowering the quota. The larger parties who have candidates in
> the quota area will reap the benefit of this increased surplus. These extra
> votes may elect an extra member for the largest party.
>      In a STV election there may be a number of candidates that have about
> the same number of votes, but the run-off chase comes down to which
> candidate is to be eliminated next. If a candidate receives an extra lump
> of votes, that can move him ahead of others, and one of the others is
> eliminated next - not him. It is as if a bear is chasing the candidates. A
> candidate does not need to run faster than the bear, he only needs to run
> faster than a few of the other candidates. The Droop Quota will help
> candidates to run faster, but only the candidates that receive the most
> surplus, and those will be the candidates of the large parties.
> 
>    The purpose of the Droop Quota is to give the larger factions an extra edge.
>    It looks like corruption - it smells like corruption - it must be corruption.
> 
>     The larger parties want the Droop Quota, and being as the larger
> parties together make up a majority of the voters, it is understandable if
> the Droop Quota is installed as a feature in most STVs. But corruption is
> still corruption, even if it is voted in by the majority.
> 
> Donald
> 
> 
>