peter barath wrote (18/04/2007):
I call a subset of candidates a quasi-clone set, if:
1. they don't make up the whole set of candidates
2. for every candidate out of the set they are in
the same winning relation with (all beat / all tie /
all lose)
(You can ask why to make the subsets at all,
On Apr 17, 2007, at 21:28 , Howard Swerdfeger wrote:
Again, I recommend a Regional Open List System.
It would be my second choice (behind STV) in therms of results
given the
requirements you mentioned.
But it would be my first choice if one was to give more weight to
simplicity of counting
1. Voters vote for up to n candidates - n being either # of open seats or # of
candidates
2. Each voter has one vote equally and evenly divided among the candidates they
voted for.
3. After doing the first count, eliminate the candidate with the fewest votes.
4. Recount all ballots, dividing
Well, actually, Hull's method *is* PR in the sense that if voters are assumed to
vote for candidates of their color only, and for all of them -
then winner-counts end up proportional.
That's nice. It's kind of a PR generalization of approval voting.
Warren D. Smith
http://rangevoting.org
At 03:37 PM 4/17/2007, Tim Hull wrote:
In my research of voting systems, PR, etc, I've been trying to come
up with the most simple candidate-based PR system that I can
possibly devise that uses votes for candidates and no other factors
to determine the winners ( i.e. open list and asset voting
