<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<p>There is a way to get round that problem of a compulsory last
preference helping to elect a candidate, that the voter opposes.</p>
<p>As you pointed out, the compulsory voting of all preferences
still holds for the Australian lower house single member
districts. So, the voter is obliged to possibly help an opponent
they would never willingly vote for. Binomial STV would put the
voter back in charge, because when the voter ranks more candidates
than there are seats, the preferences start to count more and more
against candidates. Thus, a last preference may count as much
against a candidate, as a first preference counts for a candidate.
This is because Binomial STV (apparently the sole birational
voting method) consists of a rational exclusion count exactly like
the normal election count of surplus transfers, but with the
preferences in reverse order. And abolishing the traditional STV
"last past the post" eliminations, when election surpluses run
out.</p>
<p>An exclusion count is not necessarily a negation of an election.
An elected candidate, on a quota, may not be excluded, on a quota.
That is to say a popular candidate may also be a not unpopular
candidate. <br>
</p>
<p>All possible abstentions are allowed and all are counted
(conservation of preferences), which determines how much the
voters are inclined to elect or exclude the line-up of candidates.</p>
<p>Regards,</p>
<p>Richard Lung.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 21/02/2023 00:11, Bob Richard
(lists) wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:em1be55944-bac2-4ec8-9da9-fe7c739517db@102969eb.com">
<div>I disagree with Toby here, at least under some circumstances.
But I'm speaking as a voter, not as a student of social choice
theory. To me as a voter, there can be a huge difference between
ranking a candidate last and leaving that candidate unranked.
To put it simply, under some voting rules there will always be
candidates that I am unwilling to vote for, even in last place.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>This depends on the voting rule. If the rule makes it
impossible for my last place ranking to ever help the
candidate(s) I oppose, and if I can rank multiple candidates
equal bottom, then I am willing to assign a rank to every
candidate when truncation is not allowed. But if the rule leaves
open the possibility that my last place ranking will end up
helping a candidate I oppose get elected, then I would be
obligated, as a matter of conscience, to abstain from voting at
all. This can happen, for example, in IRV when truncation is not
allowed.</div>
<div><span><br>
</span></div>
<div><span>If I were Australian, I would end up paying the fine
for not voting after every election.</span></div>
<div><span><br>
</span></div>
<div><span>--Bob Richard</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>------ Original Message ------</div>
<div>From "Toby Pereira" <<a
href="mailto:tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk" moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext">tdp201b@yahoo.co.uk</a>></div>
<div>To "Colin Champion" <<a
href="mailto:colin.champion@routemaster.app"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">colin.champion@routemaster.app</a>>;
"Forest Simmons" <<a
href="mailto:forest.simmons21@gmail.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">forest.simmons21@gmail.com</a>></div>
<div>Cc "EM" <<a
href="mailto:election-methods@lists.electorama.com"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">election-methods@lists.electorama.com</a>></div>
<div>Date 2/20/2023 3:14:01 AM</div>
<div>Subject Re: [EM] Hey guys, look at this...</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div id="xadbe9accd3de410">
<blockquote type="cite" class="cite2">
<div class="ydpd1b84f68yahoo-style-wrap">
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">One thing I'm
uncomfortable with is the notion of "unranked" candidates.
If there are 4 candidates - A, B, C and D - and one ballot
has A>B>C>D and another just A>B>C, they
should be treated as the same. Unranked is just (possibly
joint) last and I don't see it as having special status.</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false"><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr" data-setdir="false">Toby</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<div id="ydp678f550ayahoo_quoted_7091018887"
class="ydp678f550ayahoo_quoted">
<div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="moz-mime-attachment-header"></fieldset>
<pre class="moz-quote-pre" wrap="">----
Election-Methods mailing list - see <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://electorama.com/em">https://electorama.com/em</a> for list info
</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>