[EM] D'Hondt without lists

[Olli Salmi]

>The d'Hondt rule is implicit in both Proportional Approval Voting (PAV)
>and Sequential PAV.

I think sequential PAV is very nice and with a small number of votes and
candidates it could even be counted manually. But the problem with it is
that you cannot order the candidates on your ballot paper. Your vote,
evenly divided between the successful candidates, goes to the most popular
candidates in your list. You can control your vote only by making the set
of your approved candidates small. It's the same with ordinary Approval.
You specify a set of candidates and your one vote is counted for the most
popular candidate in the set. The other voters make the final decision for
you.

I thought about modifying non-sequential PAV so that the weights 1, 1/2,
1/3.., would be taken in preferential order. You would add 1/n to the
voters satisfaction score if his or her nth candidate was successful. That
seems to be equivalent to the Varrentrapp/Burnitz/Homén method.

If we add 1/n to the satisfaction score only if a voter gets his or her
n-1'th choice elected we have the Swedish method, if I counted it right and
if my small example was representative.

Olli Salmi


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