Abd,
You wrote:
Now, I wonder if there is anyone on this list who thinks that
overvotes should not be counted?
Let me first make it clear that I agree that FPP is awful and that
Approval would be a huge improvement. However, simply counting all
overvotes at full value is an attempt to sneak
Approval in through the back door which is arguably not appropriate in a
civilised and democratic country. (Maybe not relevant.)
While the method is FPP and not Approval, I think the fairest way to
handle overvotes is to count them at fractional value summing to one on
each ballot.
I put forward two arguments:
(1) If overvotes are regularly counted at full value, and this is
widely known, then overvoting will become a regular way of voting, and
so if votes are tampered with by having them
vote for an extra candidate this could be done on a much bigger scale
without looking so suspicious.
(2) What is the ballot instruction? If it is to check one candidate,
then its absurd that very many (maybe all) the voters have an incentive
to do otherwise.
Also its unfair that voters who obey the ballot instruction (which I
assume is a "law") should be penalised in comparison with overvoters who
have the luxury of fully voting both
their favourites and compromises. That is like having a speeding limit,
not enforcing it, and creating incentives to speed.
Another possible source of unfairness and absurdity is that some voting
equipment might not enable voters to overvote. That would mean that the
system is unofficial Approval
for some voters, but enforced FPP for others.
Chris Benham
----
Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
