<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<p><br>
</p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 19/04/2023 09:44, Richard Lung
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:84b5cb31-1b43-96bb-5cee-b84222b30178@ukscientists.com">
<p><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<w:WordDocument>
<w:View>Normal</w:View>
<w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>
<w:Compatibility>
<w:BreakWrappedTables/>
<w:SnapToGridInCell/>
<w:ApplyBreakingRules/>
<w:WrapTextWithPunct/>
<w:UseAsianBreakRules/>
<w:UseFELayout/>
</w:Compatibility>
<w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>
</w:WordDocument>
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]>
<style>
/* Style Definitions */
table.MsoNormalTable
{mso-style-name:"Table Normal";
mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;
mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;
mso-style-noshow:yes;
mso-style-parent:"";
mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt;
mso-para-margin:0cm;
mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";}
</style>
<![endif]--> </p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">The British Labour Party Intermediate Plant Report
(betimes on their website) cited Riker for non-monotonicity of
STV.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">When an election has no more surplus votes to
transfer, the trailing candidate is eliminated to redistribute
their vote to next preferences.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">A scenario can be imagined, in which a contender
for election receives more votes, but this results in the
elimination of a less favorable candidate, with an adverse,
instead of a positive, effect on the contender.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">In theory, conventional STV is indeed
non-monotonic. In practise, STV elects mainly first
preferences, especially with more seats, in the multi-member
constituency. This robustness may be explained because the
Riker test example, for instance, is not a typical STV
election with surplus transfers. Rather it is a purely
eliminative count of candidates with the least first
preferences.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">This consideration also suggests, in my personal
opinion, that STV could be made monotonic, if the irrational
method of elimination were discarded. It would be possible to
use quota election, with surplus transfer, also for an
“exclusion quota,” by conducting exactly the same
(symmetrical) count, but with the preferences counted in
reverse order. This “Binomial” STV (a bi-nomial count) would
be a (consistent) one-truth system, which satisfies the truth,
that one voters preferences may be another voters
unpreferences, and therefore cannot logically be treated
differently.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Polarising candidates might win both an election
quota and an exclusion quota. This would be a case of what
Forest Simmons calls “Schrödinger’s candidate” (after
Schrödinger’s cat, deemed, in quantum theory, to be both alive
and dead!) The result could be settled, one way or the other,
by a Quotient of the exclusion quota to the election quota.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">The relative importance of election or exclusion,
to the voters, could be measured by the counting of
abstentions. This might cause one seat, or more, to remain
unfilled. This greater use of preference information would
satisfy the fundamental principle of the conservation of
information, which is breached by candidate elimination rules.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">“Binomial STV” thus conforms to the Incompleteness
theorem. “Godel showed that mathematics could not be both
complete and consistent…” (James Gleick </span><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">“The Information.” Fourth estate, 2012. Chapter
7.)</span></span><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""></span><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""> For, Binomial STV election and exclusion of
candidates follows a consistent count. But its counting of
abstentions may leave an incomplete election to all the seats.
Whereas, practically all conventional election methods seek to
completely fill all the seats, but use variously inconsistent
election and exclusion rules.</span><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Regards,</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold"">Richard Lung.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""><br>
</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span
style="font-size:16.0pt;font-family:"Arial Rounded MT
Bold""><br>
</span></p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>