[EM] Condorcet meeting

[Forest Simmons]

Very ingenious and practical, since you are just repurposing standard, off
the shelf procedures.

On Mon, Aug 28, 2023, 12:37 PM Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
wrote:

> On 8/28/23 19:24, Forest Simmons wrote:
> > For practical purposes, this appeals to me the most so far.
> >
> > But the question remains about how to determine the number N.
> >
> > Why not just use the number ranked (or approved, as the case may be) on
> > the average primary ballot?
>
> Here's a similar approach with an idea to preserve a kind of clone
> independence:
>
> Use STV, but don't eliminate candidates when they're elected, just
> reweight the ballots according to surplus instead.
>
> When a candidate is elected again, he only appears once in the final
> outcome, but the number of candidates in the outcome is reduced by one
> instead. In effect, the duplicate election leads to the election of a
> "hole" that takes up a spot without assigning any candidate to that spot.
>
> Say N = 5, so that the Droop quota is 1/6. Then a candidate with
> above-majority support (say 1/2 + epsilon) gets three such quotas, and
> is elected three times: once to get into the finalist set, and twice
> more to reduce the number of other candidates from four to two.
>
> The idea is that if the candidate were to be cloned, then these clones
> would occupy three spots of the outcome, so the result is the same; just
> in one case, there's only one winner from that bloc and two "holes",
> while in the other case, there would be three winners from the bloc.
>
> I would probably reserve one of the five spots for the primary CW,
> though. Ideally it would use a proportional ordering or a pairwise STV
> variant, but then we're moving into "deluxe, complex method" territory.
>
> -km
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20230828/ab43d782/attachment.htm>