<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META name=GENERATOR content="MSHTML 8.00.6001.18904">
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Peter,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Some good sources of PR advocacy (in English)
are FairVote, the Proportional Representation Foundation, and the Electoral
Reform Society of the UK (though most of these focus on single transferable
vote, and some folks on this list prefer other methods).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>FairVote's site is here <A
href="http://www.fairvote.org/fair-representation">http://www.fairvote.org/fair-representation</A> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Proportional Representation Foundation's
is </FONT><FONT size=2 face=Arial><A
href="http://prfound.org/">http://prfound.org/</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>and The Electoral Reform Society's is here <A
href="http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/">http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2 face=Arial>Terry Bouricius</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="FONT: 10pt arial; BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=pzbornik@gmail.com href="mailto:pzbornik@gmail.com">Peter Zbornik</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A title=km-elmet@broadpark.no
href="mailto:km-elmet@broadpark.no">Kristofer Munsterhjelm</A> ; <A
title=election-methods@electorama.com
href="mailto:election-methods@electorama.com">Election Methods</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, May 19, 2010 11:27
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [EM] Why proportional
elections - Power arguments needed (Czech green party)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV>Dear all,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>just a post scriptum to the email below to make things clear:</DIV>
<DIV>I wonder if there is a short and to the point argument for dummies,
why proportional elections (say elections meeting the droop quota) leave the
voters happier than winner-takes it all elections.</DIV>
<DIV>This "for dummies" explanation of the advantages of proportional voting
could be combined with a longer technical explanation, perhaps using
social welfare functions. for people with time and interest to
understand the argument in full.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I don't mean that the argument above would be the best argument, but it
could be a really interesting one.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best regards</DIV>
<DIV>Peter Zborník<BR><BR></DIV>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Wed, May 19, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Peter Zbornik <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A
href="mailto:pzbornik@gmail.com">pzbornik@gmail.com</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>Dear Kristoffer, dear readers,</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Kristofer, you wrote below: "A minor opinion within the party
might need time to grow, and might in the end turn out to be significant,
but using a winner-takes-it-all method quashes such minority opinions before
they get the chance."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Thanks, yes I have used this line of argument a lot (we actually have a
global charter of the greens, according to which the greens are
obliged to put the same principles into practice in thei organizations
as they work for in society).</DIV>
<DIV>The problem is, that this argument does not "stick", it is simply not
sexy.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Would it be possible to measure the "utility"
or "happiness" among the voters in the party compared to different
election methods. I saw you Kristofer did some work on this but I didn't
understand it, I guess I lack the preliminaries.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I guess the notion of "Bayesian regret" or something similar could be
used to argue that proportional elections are better than block-voting, but
I have no idea of how to explain this, as I don't know the subject at all
(pareto optimal social allocations, or whatever).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>It seems intuitive that economic tools could be used (I know almost no
economics), since ranked ballot elections simply are explicitly stated
preference orderings. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I guess that voting and elections, could be indeed one of the best
imaginable real-world examples, where preference orderings of the
actors actually are known, and thus all of the machinery of economic
equilibria and social welfare functions could be applied (like the
Bernoulli-Nash social welfare function).</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I am personally interested in the possiblity of measuring utility, is
there some (preferably short) literature on social welfare, utility and
voting theory for proportional elections (I know some
undergrad maths and statistics)?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Best regards</DIV>
<DIV>Peter<FONT color=#888888><BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<DIV></DIV>
<DIV class=h5>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Kristofer
Munsterhjelm <SPAN dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:km-elmet@broadpark.no"
target=_blank>km-elmet@broadpark.no</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>
<DIV>Peter Zbornik wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; PADDING-LEFT: 1ex"
class=gmail_quote>Dear all,<BR> thank you for your help with the
election system for the council elections of the green party.<BR>I will
try to move on with technical testing of Schulze's methods and the
specification of the elections to the party lists as soon as time
allows.<BR>Thanks all for the support and all methods supplied.<BR>I
never could imagine that I would get such a response.<BR>When advocating
proportional elections in the party, I have found it difficult to
explain to other members of the green party why proportional elections
to our party organs is a good thing.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR></DIV>As far as I
remember, your party, the Czech Green Party, is a minor party. Therefore,
it might be possible to draw an analogy to the proportional methods used
by the Czech Republic itself. Without proportional representation, the
Green Party would have next to no chance of ever getting into parliament.
However, since your nation does use proportional representation, there is
some chance.<BR><BR>The same argument could be used within the party.
Since the Green Party is a minor party, I reason that the party membership
honestly believes the presence of that party is a good thing. Thus, they
would also know (to some extent, at least), that minor groups of opinion -
like their own party in comparison to the major parties - can be good and
can add valuable ideas to governance. Then could not the same argument be
used for the party itself? A minor opinion within the party might need
time to grow, and might in the end turn out to be significant, but using a
winner-takes-it-all method quashes such minority opinions before they get
the chance.<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR></DIV></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></DIV><BR>
<P>
<HR>
<P></P>----<BR>Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em
for list info<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>