<HTML><BODY>
<div><b>James <span class="correction" id="">Gilmour</span></b>
<a href="mailto:election-methods%40electorama.com?Subject=%5BEM%5D%20PR-STV%20and%20vote%20management&In-Reply-To=8C9517AD59380F6-73C-1131B%40WEBMAIL-RB09.sysops.aol.com" title="[EM] PR-STV and vote management"><span class="correction" id="">jgilmour</span> at <span class="correction" id="">globalnet</span>.co.<span class="correction" id="">uk</span>
</a><br>
<span style="font-family: monospace;"><br>
> </span>> <a href="http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com"><span class="correction" id="">raphfrk</span> at <span class="correction" id="">netscape</span>.net</a> > Sent: 20 April 2007 16:51<br>
<pre>> ><i> Under the standard rules,<br>
</i>> ><i> you are not making any claim about what candidates you want to get<br>
</i>> ><i> elected, you are just ranking them.<br>
</i>> <br>
> I don't know what "standard rules" you have in mind, but that does seem<br>
> to me to be a perverse interpretation of marking preferences in an<br>
> <span class="correction" id="">STV-PR</span> election. If there are 3 places to be filled and you have marked<br>
> preferences for 5 of the 9 candidates, you are surely saying that "the<br>
> candidates you want to get elected" are those three you have marked "1",<br>
> "2" and "3". You may not achieve that (because not enough other voters<br>
> agree with you), but that is surely what you are claiming you want.<br>
<br>
<br>
Optimal strategy in <span class="correction" id="">PR-STV</span> is to rank all the candidates (actually all bar 1). <br>
What you are saying is the order in which you would like to elect a candidate.<br>
You shouldn't stop ranking once you hit a candidate that you hate (unless you<br>
hate all the remaining candidates equally). The only time it matters is when<br>
all your more preferred candidates have been elected or eliminated and the<br>
effect of your vote will be to help elect a candidate (or if you prefer<br>
your vote will be used to help eliminate a candidate you don't like).<br>
<br>
If the choices were great, good, bad and Hitler, you should vote<br>
<br>
great: 1<br>
good: 2<br>
bad: 3<br>
<br>
Your vote for bad doesn't mean that you would like him to get elected,<br>
it just means that you prefer him to Hitler. Your vote will only go to<br>
bad if the other 2 are eliminated or elected and he thus he may need it <br>
to beat Hitler (which is what you want to happen in that situation).<br>
<br>
Under the system where candidates have to get the quota no matter what, <br>
then the situation changes. The new best strategy is to rank all the<br>
candidates except for candidates who you prefer less to the seat being<br>
left vacant.<br>
<br>
In the above example, you might vote:<br>
<br>
great: 1<br>
good: 2<br>
<br>
This means that your vote will help one of the 2 to get elected, but<br>
will never help bad or Hitler get elected. It could deadlock the<br>
election and leave the seat vacant.<br>
</pre>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div style="clear: both;"><span class="correction" id="">Raphfrk</span><br>
--------------------<br>
Interesting site<br>
"what if anyone could modify the laws"<br>
<br>
<span class="correction" id="">www</span>.<span class="correction" id="">wikocracy</span>.<span class="correction" id="">com</span></div>
<div> </div>
<!-- end of AOLMsgPart_0_9a140894-7f38-4843-88d2-a5a4c19c8b39 -->
<div class="AOLPromoFooter">
<hr style="margin-top:10px;" />
<a href="http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100122638x1081283466x1074645346/aol?redir=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eaim%2Ecom%2Ffun%2Fmail%2F" target="_blank"><b>Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail</b></a> -- 2 GB of storage and industry-leading spam and email virus protection.<br />
</div>
</BODY></HTML>