[EM] MCA in use

Alex Small asmall at physics.ucsb.edu
Fri Aug 16 20:52:21 PDT 2002


Adam argued that in Approval elections the best strategy may not be to
simply vote for all candidates whom you approve on a "gut level."  In
public elections this is certainly true.

On a small committee, however, there may be more incentive to vote for all
candidates whom you approve on a "gut level".  If during the deliberations
and discussions of the committee you say "Well, so and so is a decent
candidate.  Not my favorite, but I'd be OK with him as our officer if
that's what most other people want" and then you fail to vote for him, the
people who appointed you to that committee (presumably fellow members of a
religious congregations in Joe's example) may not look at you as somebody
who can act with the best interests of the congregation in mind.

Alex


----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em

FFrom election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com  Fri Aug 16 23:38:50 2002
Received: (from smartlst at localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26123;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:37:53 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:37:53 -0700
Reply-To: <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
From: "James Gilmour" <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
To: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [EM] D'Hondt without lists
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 07:37:53 +0100
Message-ID: <000201c245b8$9d477480$ae16bd50 at U2AMD750>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GHP.4.32.0208161501130.20993-100000 at appserv.sya.pcc.edu>
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"sFjLA.0.3O6.1zUNz"@mx1>
Resent-From: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com> archive/latest/8551
X-Loop: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com


> Forest Simmons wrote (in part)
> Ordinary (i.e. non-sequential PAV) is a little harder to describe, but it
> is easy to find by searching for PAV in the EM archives.

Please tell me how I get access to the EM archives to search for these descriptions.
I have been to the eskimo.com pages, but cannot see the way in.

James Gilmour

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em

rom election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com  Fri Aug 16 23:38:51 2002
Received: (from smartlst at localhost)
	by mx1.eskimo.com (8.9.1a/8.8.8) id XAA26110;
	Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:37:52 -0700
Resent-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 23:37:52 -0700
Reply-To: <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
From: "James Gilmour" <jgilmour at globalnet.co.uk>
To: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [EM] D'Hondt without lists
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2002 07:37:52 +0100
Message-ID: <000101c245b8$9c855d00$ae16bd50 at U2AMD750>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
In-Reply-To: <Pine.GHP.4.32.0208161542580.20993-100000 at appserv.sya.pcc.edu>
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Importance: Normal
Resent-Message-ID: <"3VuQn1.0.sN6.0zUNz"@mx1>
Resent-From: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
X-Mailing-List: <election-methods-list at eskimo.com> archive/latest/8550
X-Loop: election-methods-list at eskimo.com
Precedence: list
Resent-Sender: election-methods-list-request at eskimo.com

>
> On Fri, 16 Aug 2002, James Gilmour wrote in part:
>
> > That is because STV-PR,
> > unlike all other systems of PR, treats all candidates as individuals and does not rely on the existence of pre-existing
> parties or
> > other recognised groups.

> Forest replied:
> Actually there are many PR methods besides STV-PR that treat all
> candidates as individuals.
>
> The simplest of these, PAV and Sequential PAV, are based on Approval style
> ballots.
>
> More complicated are pairwise PR methods (based on the D'Hondt rule, for
> example) that reduce to Condorcet methods in the single winner case.
>

When I made my statement I had in mind voting methods that are in practical use for public elctions (parliaments, local authority
councils, etc) in countries worldwide.

I am aware of such use of Party List PR with closed lists, open lists and in Additional Member systems.
I am also awara of such use of STV-PR.

I should pleased to learn of such use of other PR voting systems, such as PAV and sequential PAV.

James Gilmour

----
For more information about this list (subscribe, unsubscribe, FAQ, etc), 
please see http://www.eskimo.com/~robla/em



More information about the Election-Methods mailing list