[EM] Why Robert's Rules is relevant to this list

[James Gilmour]

RLSuter at aol.com Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2005 8:01 PM
> To anyone
> who has become minimally well-informed about alternative
> methods for conducting votes when there are three or
> more candidates or options 

As a UK subject I am not familiar with Robert's Rules, but I think it helpful to distinguish between electing a single
winner from three candidates and making one decision when presented with three options.  Choosing the best single winner
is the toughest task in electoral science and I'll leave it to further discussion on this list.  But I would recommend
NOT using any form of multi-option vote to decide among three options for action if this can be avoided.

Frequently the three options are: 1. no change;  2. change to A;  3. change to B.  In practical experience, especially
when non-discretionary proxy votes (absent votes, "mandatories") are allowed, so that a significant proportion of those
voting cannot take part in any discussion at a meeting, I have found it best to present two, separate, simple, very
clear questions.
Q1. Given that it has been proposed we should change to either A or B, do you wish us to change?  Answer "yes" or "no".
Q2. If a majority of us vote for change, do you wish change A or change B? Answer "A" or "B".
The exact wording will depend on the nature of the related propositions being decided.  The ballot paper (for absent
votes) should make it clear that those who oppose change ("no" to Q1) should take the opportunity to answer Q2 in case a
majority do vote for change, so that their views will be taken fully into account.
This two-question approach produces clear unambiguous results.  The results of any multi-option vote (whatever system)
will always be open to interpretation.


> The trouble is that the percentage of
> parliamentarians who are well informed about voting
> methods is almost certainly extremely small, probably
> less than 1%.

Perhaps the percentage of parliamentarians who are well informed about voting methods is much higher than you suggest  -
they just don't want the system changed!!  Ignorance abounds here in the UK too, but some of the most vociferous
opponents of voting reform do understand the different systems very well.  They want to keep the present biased, unfair,
undemocratic systems because they do rather well out of them most of the time.

James Gilmour