<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 12pt;
font-family:Calibri
}
--></style></head>
<body class='hmmessage'><div dir='ltr'><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt; mso-margin-top-alt: auto; mso-margin-bottom-alt: auto;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>APR (11): Steve?s 11th
dialogue with Juho (Steve)<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>>
From: election-methods-request@lists.electorama.com<br>
> Subject: Election-Methods Digest, Vol 126, Issue 25<br>
> To: election-methods@lists.electorama.com<br>
> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 13:34:36 -0800<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> 1. Re: APR (10): Steve?s 10th dialogue with Juho (Steve) (Juho Laatu)<br>
> <br>
> >
----------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
> <br>
> Message: 1<br>
> Date: Fri, 19 Dec 2014 20:23:57 +0200<br>
> From: Juho Laatu <juho4880@yahoo.co.uk><br>
> To: "election-methods@lists.electorama.com"<br>
> <election-methods@lists.electorama.com><br>
> Subject: Re: [EM] APR (10): Steve?s 10th dialogue with Juho (Steve)<br>
> Message-ID: <304A2E4F-EB71-40CE-AC56-DAE9EF312D86@yahoo.co.uk><br>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> > On 19 Dec 2014, at 18:14, steve bosworth
<stevebosworth@hotmail.com> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> > J: The 10'000 is of course arbitrary since it is not designed for any
particular society. Each society should pick a number that suits its needs.<br>
> > <br>
> > S: Please formulate the method by which any society could ?pick? this
number without being arbitrary. APR offers one answer to this question. Can you
think of a better answer?<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The decision making body (e.g. a
parliament) estimates what would be a suitable number that does not let too
many groupings in and leaves no such groupings out that may well win a seat. It
would be good to allow also a number of such groupings in that may win seats in
some future elections, even if they may not get any seats this time. After one
or few first elections the number may be adjusted. The result is not arbitrary,
but based on the characteristics of the society in question.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I am afraid that any such decisions would be
“arbitrary” ( i.e. capricious, unpredictable, unprincipled, haphazard,
etc.).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The current parties in the
assembly (including each current majority party or coalition) has a vested
interest in excluding any threats to the methods by which it has gained
representation or domination in parliament.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>In contrast, APR’s method follows inescapably from the logical
application of the following principle:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>the vote of each citizen must be equally respected (i.e. it enables each
citizen equally to guarantee that their vote will continue to count within the
assembly through the weighted vote of the most favoured rep who has received
their vote).<br>
> <br>
> > S: I see this as too vague to allow our discussion to progress.<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>I can make the definition simpler:
"proper party" = "traditional party". This definition works
in all countries that I could quickly think.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>This “definition” seems to amount to a
confession that you are a “traditionalist”, i.e. simply tied to the status
quo.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You need to define “good” or
“improvement” independently of what already exists to escape this characterisation.<br>
> <br>
> > J: Since the outcome of the primary has a meaningful impact on the
outcome of the whole election, this does not solve my problem. Vote buyers,
coercers etc. may still have an interest to influence the outcome of the
primary.<br>
> > ><br>
> > S: It would be hard to predict this impact because voters can reverse
all expectations by secretly voting differently in the general election. If so,
do you have any reason to believe that APR would be more vulnerable to such
corruption than other system?<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Systems that do not support secret
voting tend to be vulnerable to vote buyers and coercers. In APR the general
election does not cancel all the (important and worth influencing) decisions
made in the primary (e.g. the decision on which associations are allowed to
participate).<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S: You
seem not to have appreciated the fact that an association being “allowed to
participate”, by itself, will produce no weighted votes in the assembly unless
citizens also secretly vote for its candidate(s).<br>
> <br>
> > J: For example, methods that allow only voting of one candidate are
easier to understand.<br>
> > <br>
> > S: Does the fact that APR allows citizens to choose this simplicity
rather than being forced into it provide a valid argument against APR in your
view?<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yes. The system is still complex,
although it would have one rather simple branch too.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>My question was, does this trivial extra
complexity provide “a valid argument against APR in your view?”<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><br>
> > J: I'm not proposing any alternative systems, just discussing the
properties of APR, and if those properties could be improved.<br>
> > <br>
> > S: Unfortunately, you have not yet defined the value you have in mind
that would determine what would constitute an ?improvement?. Can you do this
now?<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>No, since there are hundreds of
possibilities on what kind of improvements could be made to a voting system.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Of course, but what we need is a prime value
or principle which would enable us to assess each of the “hundreds” of proposed
changes as to whether it is or is not an improvement.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What is your “prime value”?<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><br>
> > J: And a very difficult to understand system to all.<br>
> > <br>
> > S: Please explain or name the parts of APR that you do not
understand, or you believe ordinary citizens would find hard to understand.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>> <br>
J: <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Someone already wrote on this list
that if it takes days to make the experts on this list understand the system,
then APR must be quite difficult to understand to the regular voters.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Yes, Richard Fobes said this.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, do you independently agree with
him?<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>If so, “please explain or name the
parts of APR that you do not understand, or you believe ordinary citizens would
find hard to understand.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>Also,
what do you think of Richard’s and my attempt jointly to draft a more simple
summary of APR?<br>
> <br>
> > J: I see us as experts, discussing the properties of APR. The
decisions will be made by the societies (whose members also we might be) that
may take different methods into use. Maybe we can help them in their decision
making by providing good methods, and good explanations on how they work.<br>
> > <br>
> > S: Of course, I agree with this aim. However, I do not see how our
dialogue can make any further progress until you find yourself able to define
what you mean by ?good methods?, what constitutes ?improvements?, or are able
to describe the practical system that would also be your ?ideal?.<br>
> <br>
J:<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>You can take my comments one by one,
and estimate if the arguments that I give are in your opinion on the right path
towards a good method.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>S: You
seem to want me only to make a purely “subjective” judgment in response to your
“comments”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>However, as I see it, these
will only be “arguments” if you can show them logically to follow from evidence
and some “prime value” that might claim to be “objective”.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As you know, I see a democratically equal respect
for each citizen’s vote as one value that follows from my own prime value which
I see as objective, namely: <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>the value of
“free rational living”.<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'>You have
not explicitly rejected the value I place on the equality of citizens but you
seem not to share it.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Instead, you seem simply
to want to accept the inequalities in the status quo (i.e. in the currently
dominant traditions).<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>What do you think?<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style='font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-fareast-language: EN-GB;'><br>
> Juho<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;">
<br style="mso-special-character: line-break;">
<o:p></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font><p style="margin: 0cm 0cm 0pt;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-ansi-language: EN-GB;"><o:p><font face="Times New Roman"> </font></o:p></span></p><font face="Times New Roman">
</font> </div></body>
</html>