[EM] Voting systems theory and proportional representation vssimple representation. (Abd ul-Rahman Lomax)

[Raph Frank]

On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 7:09 AM, Kathy Dopp <kathy.dopp at gmail.com> wrote:
> Yikes Raph. I didn't know that the method was potentially
> nonmonotonic.  I oppose all nonmonotonic methods.

Yeah, I know.  I brought it up in the interests of honesty.

However, there is another thread titled "A monotonic proportional
multiwinner method", that may have a method for combining ranked votes
in a way that is proportional and is monotonic.

It should be possible to run the method on a candidate list system.

> I would think that you could simple set a threshold number of votes to
> win a seat and then redistribute all excess votes for candidates to
> the 1st candidates on their own lists, then redistribute all the
> excess votes that resulted from that redistribution, etc. until there
> are no excess votes and all positions are filled.

Yeah, that is what I was thinking, though I would redistribute based
on the next preference on the candidate who transferred in the vote.

However, I think the method is non-monotonic, as it is basically the
same thing as PR-STV, but with restricted ballots.

> Yes, it would be much more complex than party list systems where none
> of the candidates were on more than one party list, but what about
> party list systems with shared candidates?

It is more complex, but the complexity would occur during tabulation.
The election results would just be a list of votes received by each
candidate.  Anyone would then be able to run the algorithm.