[Election-Methods] RE : Re: Primary Elections using a "Top 2/Single Transferable Voting Method"

Juho juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Dec 19 10:39:24 PST 2007

On Dec 19, 2007, at 7:17 , Abd ul-Rahman Lomax wrote:

> What is not well-known -- or even
> known at all -- is what the following would be, if done in the kind
> of way we have been proposing (Asset Voting, with the electors
> remaining active with voting rights in an assembly if they choose to
> use them -- otherwise the representative they have seated effectively
> votes for them):

This could be categorized as "flexible transitions between  
representative and direct democracy". One can make the choice even  
case by case and day by day. Also most of the benefits and problems  
are a mixture of those of the representative and direct models (not  
straight forward average though).

>> Multiple layer hierarchy
>> + less voters per representative => closer contacts and feedback
>> + responsibility and contact between top and bottom layers lost in
>> the multiple steps
>> - vote opinions may be lost in the multiple steps
>> - civil servant / politician centric thinking concentrates step by  
>> step
> The second point is totally speculative. An elector would not have
> "responsibility and contact lost" over the current system, rather
> these would both be increased.

I think both low and high hierarchies have problems but of different  
nature. The strength of them can be debated.

One example of a long path related problem. The representative tells  
the voter that he agrees with the voter but that he has some problems  
with the next level representative. The discussions between the first  
and second representative may not reflect the discussions with the  

> the proxies are
> bidirectional filters, preventing proxies above from being
> overwhelmed with input from below, and, likewise, preventing
> base-level clients from being overwhelmed with information from the
> center.

In an ideal situation this could be a benefit of the long hierarchy  
model. Discussion topics would change according to the needs in the  
chain. This kind of behaviour is not guaranteed though (also unwanted  
filtering could occur and filtering could pass information that is  
more marketing/bluff than what the receiver would want).

> DP and Asset Voting are not dependent upon parties

One could use also e.g. STV without parties.


The all-new Yahoo! Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list