[Election-Methods] [english 94%] Re: method design challenge +new method AMP

[raphfrk at netscape.net]

Juho wrote:

> Here's an example on how the proposed method might work.

> 

> I'll use your set of votes but only the rankings.

> 51: A>C>B

> 49: B>C>A

> 

> Let's then reverse the votes to see who the voters don't like.

> 51: B>C>A

> 49: A>C>B

>

> Then we'll use STV (or some other proportional method) to select 2 ?

> (=3-1) candidates. STV would elect B and A. B and A are thus the ?

> worst candidates (proportionally determined) that will be eliminated. ?

> Only C remains and is the winner.



This is not? clone independent.



52: A>C>B

48: B>C>A



B+A 'elected', so C wins



However, if it is changed to



26: A1>A2>C>B

26: A2>A1>C>B

48: B>C>A1>A2



Since 3 are now elected, it requires 25% of the vote per candidate elected.



the 52 block can 'elect' B and C and the 48 block elects A2.



This means that A1 wins as he isn't picked.







One possible solution to the clone issue is to scale the number of candidates to first choice vote.



In effect, in the STV stage, the quota for each candidate would be equal to the number of first choice votes the candidate received.



To be 'elected', the candidate would have to exceed the quota.



The first candidate to be eliminated becomes the winner.



Reversed votes:



26: B>C>A1>A2

26: B>C>A2>A1

48: A2>A1>C>B



Quotas (number of first choices in original ballots):

A2: 26

A1: 26

C: 0

B: 48



Round 1:



A1: 0 

A2: 48

B: 52

C: 0



B exceeds quota by 4 and A2 exceeds quota by 22



Round 2:

A1: 22 (-26)

A2*: 26 (+26)

B*: 48 (-4)

C: 4 (+4)



C is elected though, so A1 still wins.



Note this is clone independent though:



Quotas

A: 52

B: 48

C: 0



Round 1:

A: 48

B: 52

C: 0



B exceeds quota



Round 2:

A: 48

B: 48

C: 4



C exceeds quota



A wins.



However, if 5 voters voted C first choice, then C would be eliminated as being on the lowest total.



One option for that would be to allow people cast a nominating vote as well as the ranking.? The total number of nominee votes would become the quota for each candidate.? If a reasonable number of people (5%) recognised C as a compromise, then he would win.



I am not sure of the tactical issues associated with the 2 votes though.


Also, it is majority compliant.? If a majority support a candidate first choice (i.e. first choice and nominate him), then he cannot lose.


Another issue is how to actually layout the ballot.? It might be worth having voters enter the reversed ballot order.? In most practical cases, voters would need to enter their lowest ranked candidates, unlike in normal STV where it would be their most ranked.


The ballot instructions could be something like:


Place an X beside the candidate you wish to nominate in the nominate column


In the rank column, rank the candidates in order of your preference giving a rank of 1 to your least favourite, 2 to your next least favourite and so on


You do not have to rank all the candidates and any you do not rank will be considered preferred to any ranked candidate


Raphfrk
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"

www.wikocracy.com
________________________________________________________________________
AOL's new homepage has launched. Take a tour at http://info.aol.co.uk/homepage/ now.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20080503/934b0375/attachment-0003.htm>