[EM] real world 9-winner election using RRV

[Jameson Quinn]

Note that since those results are printed as soon as all seats are filled,
the remaining ballot weight (the number next to each candidate) is at an
approval cutoff of >=5.

I can't say I understand why they would want a full ordering, though, aside
from gossipy curiosity. If it's for choosing alternates, they should be
aware that things will no longer be proportional, as others have pointed
out.

2011/6/25 Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>

> I added a line to print out the remaining candidates, in decreasing order
> of remaining reweighted ballots, as soon as all seats were filled. (After
> first finding that if I actually ran the leftover protocol, it only gave one
> candidate, because after all the reweighting up to that point, all remaining
> voters had rated C112 at least 1, or had rated all unelected candidates at
> 0!)
>
> Here are the results:
>
> [(2.3733215978628448, 'C112'), (2.2897381094867288, 'C107'),
> (2.2889828846114861, 'C116'), (2.0589562392103486, 'C114'),
> (1.9386972538747298, 'C115'), (1.8028994309791222, 'C113'),
> (1.6913049936093174, 'C111')]
>
> So that should be appended to my earlier results to give a full ranking.
>
> JQ
>
>
> 2011/6/25 Warren Smith <warren.wds at gmail.com>
>
>> The musical group who wanted me to process their election, actually
>> wanted, not
>> a list of 9 winners, but actually an ordering of all 16 candidates,
>> top 9 being the winners.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Warren D. Smith
>> http://RangeVoting.org  <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
>> "endorse" as 1st step)
>> and
>> math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html
>>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20110625/3e6d7424/attachment-0004.htm>