Josh wrote:
Has anyone written on the relation between multi-option voting systems and parliamentary procedure? I was thinking this morning... Why have votes on amendments at all? All amendments and the bill itself could be voted on simultaneously. In that context, you can wager your lunch they would want Approval or Condorcet, not IRV. :) Anyone know anything about this? I reply: People who study single-winner methods agree that it makes more sense, and avoids proposal-order strategies, to vote on the proposal and the status-quo, and the amendments to the proposal, all in one balloting, using a good voting system. But of course how things are done sometimes seems to be unrelated to how things should be done. Well, if we first get better people in Congress, which would happen with better voting systems, then they could improve the choice methods used in Congress. But if anyone is in an organization that uses parliamentary Sequential Pairwise, they should suggest Approval, Condorcet(wv), or Bucklin (if members want rank-balloting but not computerization). Mike Ossipoff _________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
