[EM] Quotaless STV-PR suggestion

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 07/02/2013 07:09 PM, Chris Benham wrote:

> I am sure this meets Droop Proportionality for Solid Coalitions.

Does that mean that the method reduces to largest remainders Droop when 
the voters vote for all candidates of a single party each?

That would be interesting because there's no explicit quota in the 
system anywhere -- but I suppose it wouldn't be unprecedented, since 
Schulze STV doesn't have an explicit quota anywhere either.

> At least some versions of STV-PR have the problem that adding or
> removing a few ballots that vote for nobody (say just plump for some
> X that is ignored or voted no higher than equal-bottom on all the
> other ballots)  can change at
> least one of the winners by changing the size of the quota. It is
> much simpler than Meek to explain and operate, but seems (from some
> examples I've seen) to give Meek-like results.

Yes, it does seem to be simpler than Meek.