[EM] Same goal, opposite results. Examine the differences.

[MIKE OSSIPOFF]

Say, for a particular census, we do allocations bv Hill and by Bias-Free. 
Say your measure of proportional disparity is the _ratio_ of s/q, rather 
than its difference. So, by that standard, any trransfer of a seat, starting 
with the Hill allocation, will put the two affected states more disparate in 
their s/q.

But say, as should usually be the case, the Bias-Free allocation is less 
biased, by some tests for bias.

How to choose between those two allocations and their justifying standards?

1) The Hill transfer property is about your state's s/q disparity with a 
particular state, whichever one is involved in the disagreement between the 
2 allocations. Bias-Free's unbias is overall.

2) There's a difference in _when_ the s/q disparity is looked at. With 
Hill's transfer property, the disparilty is looked at after the count, 
juding the s/q disparity of those two states in hindsight.
Bias-Free's unbias means a uniform s/q expectation for _all_ states, as 
judged before the apportionment and the census. And of course, the time when 
you're deciding which method to advocate or adopt is a time before the 
census, and certainly before the allocation. So it makes the most sense to 
choose the method that gets rid of s/q expectation disparity as judged at a 
time _before_ the census and allocation.

Mike Ossipoff

_________________________________________________________________
Get free, personalized commercial-free online radio with MSN Radio powered 
by Pandora http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001