[EM] Raph: Sainte-Lague. Transfers in party-list PR.

[Juho Laatu]

On 19.7.2012, at 14.40, Raph Frank wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:58 PM, Michael Ossipoff
> <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, but if a large party suplus-transfers to another party,and it,
>> too,as a result, acquires a quota and must transfer,then the
>> destination for that next transfer can just be that 2nd party's
>> transfer-choice. All of the transfers, surplus and elimination, could
>> be accommodated by each party publishing a single transfer-choice
> 
> You could end up with a loop, if small parties tended to nominate each
> other.  However, as long as the loop has enough votes to get some
> seats, then it isn't that big an issue.  It would prevent the loop of
> parties from transferring outside the loop.

Trees would be a simple approach that has no loops and where support is always mutual.

Juho