[EM] STV - the transferrable part is OK (fair), the sequential round elimination is not

[Kevin Venzke]

Hello,

--- En date de : Sam 31.10.09, Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com> a écrit :
> De: Jonathan Lundell <jlundell at pobox.com>
> Objet: Re: [EM] STV - the transferrable part is OK (fair), the sequential  round elimination is not
> À: "Juho" <juho4880 at yahoo.co.uk>
> Cc: kathy.dopp at gmail.com, "Election Methods" <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
> Date: Samedi 31 Octobre 2009, 12h26
> On Oct 31, 2009, at 10:25 AM, Juho
> wrote:
> 
> > (PR makes sense in general but I wouldn't deny people
> the right to achieve the political balance using two-party
> systems if they so want.)
> 
> How would this decision be made? Majority rule?

It's not hard to imagine a referendum with that kind of effect. I
don't see how you can get away from majority rule; even if we elect
a body using PR-STV to vote on the party system, that's still majority
rule (or a super-majority rule with a possibility of no outcome), it's
just different people voting in the end.

Kevin Venzke