[EM] does Election-methode require e-voting?

Gervase Lam gervase at group.force9.co.uk
Thu Nov 20 15:33:10 PST 2003


> Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2003 01:11:06 +0100
> From: David GLAUDE <dglaudemailing at gmx.net>
> Subject: [EM] does Election-methode require e-voting?

> How hard is it to manually "count the vote" for those method to be
> applyed? How hard is it to hand compute the result (once the vote are
> properly hand counted)?
> Do you need "computer counting and voter intend recording" for those or
> some of those methode to be practicaly applyed?

Well, the thread you inspired me into starting (Subject: Hand counting 
election methods) is sort of part of the way there.  What I was thinking 
of was starting small [e.g. MCA (which I think is too similar to Approval 
for there to be a worthwhile comment), Condorcet] and then possibly move 
up to the multi-seat methods that you mention, if I have the inclination.

I've only recently realised how massive this thread could be considering 
the number of election/voting methods there are.  Most of the discussion 
on this list has been about discussing the best/worst things of election 
methods.  For each of the methods mentioned, you've then got discuss how 
each method can be hand counted.

Hand counting of one multi-seat method was touched upon a month ago 
(Subject: Using Borda to Set an Agenda).  Forest Simmons sent a post 
explaining that Sequential PAV (Proportional Approval Voting) could be 
used.  I sent a post in response to this with an adapted version of 
Sequential PAV that used whole numbers.  As a result of this, I started 
thinking about (Non-Sequential) PAV.  When I have the time and 
inclination, I will probably post a reply to the thread.

PAV is probably better than Sequential PAV for multi-seat elections.  Adam 
Tarr posted a message on 12th February 2002 with a very good reason why.  
This post is in the middle of probably the most crucial and interesting 
thread on PAV.

Unfortunately, I really haven't answered the questions.  The only thing I 
can give at the moment are places to start from.

>From what I can tell so far, when converting single-seat to multi-seat 
election methods, all of the answers to the questions are changed.  It is 
usually for the worse because most of the time you have to re-count the 
ballots to determine the next seat.

Also, I'll need to do a lot of reading, especially to widen my knowledge 
of other election methods, in order to answer the questions.  Again, this 
is highly inclination dependent.

Thanks,
Gervase.




More information about the Election-Methods mailing list