[EM] Re: "Implied ranked choice" method

[Stephane Rouillon]

Again,

not only multi-member districts can produce proportional results.
It can be done with single-member districts using nominative ballots if one treats
the information in a proper way to obtain a fully proportional representation
(SPPA is only one example).

In fact several multi-member methods are only semi-proportional representation.
But it is better than FPTP and I would take it any time!!! (Go STV go...)

When combining a preferential ballot and proportional representation, one should
start to ask himself if the result wanted should be proportional to the first choices
or to the rallied (transferred) choices... Life is usually not black and white.

Steph.

James Gilmour a écrit :

> Rob Brown  > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2004 11:10 PM
> > So, can you tell me a significant real world advantage to  allowing voters
> > explicitly rank them, other than simply speculating that they  will demand it
> > if it is not offered?  Will the election actually produce
> > significantly "better" results if people are allowed to do so?
>
> If  you have multi-member districts so that you can elect a properly representative legislature (or
> council), the voter must mark preferences against the candidates so that the votes can, when
> necessary, be transferred in accordance with the wishes of  respective voters.  If you do not make
> the votes transferable, you cannot obtain full PR.  I would suggest that full PR is a significantly
> better result than either no PR or very poor PR.
>
> James
>
> ----
> Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info