Any thoughts about this article or, more generally, Australia's voting system? An interesting difference between it and the IRV method that has gained wide support in the U.S. is that voters have the option of voting for a single party and letting that party allocate their preferences. This was in the L.A. Times.
Interesting. I like the fact that the article played up the voter interface (ranked-choice or preference voting) rather than focusing on the counting method. I suspect someone else knows the technical details.
For PR elections, I personally think that a variant of STV which allows a candidate/party to delegate a 'bullet vote' to someone else might be useful. I don't see much value for that in a Condorcet-style single-winner election, though (but I haven't thought much about it, so I could well be wrong).
I may link to this from my reform proposal, thanks.
-- Ernie P.
On Oct 8, 2004, at 6:22 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
One effect of the preferential ballot is a flourishing multiparty system that has resulted in the election of minor party candidates to Parliament and prompts the major parties to reach out to smaller voting blocs in their quest for second-place votes.
Under the preferential selection rules, voters also have the option of voting for a single party and letting that party allocate their preferences. The Green Party has pledged its preferences to the Labor Party.
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
