Doreen Dotan wrote: > */[EMAIL PROTECTED] > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>/* > > Antonio jwrote: > > >STV was a half-hearted attempt to fix a broken system, SNTV. > > In learning a bit about SNTV I came across this curious factoid: "The > New Party <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Party_%28Taiwan%29> (of > Taiwan, my parentheses) had a surprisingly effective system by asking > party supporters to vote for the candidate that corresponded to their > birthdate. This led to a system of vote allocation > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vote_allocation> which had been adopted by > all parties for the 2004 ROC Legislative elections." > (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_non-transferable_vote). Why is this???
Consider an election for 5 seats with the ballots: A (New Party): 50% B (New Party): 5% C (New Party): 5% D (Old Party): 12% E (Old Party): 11% F (Old Party): 9% G (Old Party): 8% Even thought the New Party has the majority of the votes, these are mostly "wasted" on a candidate who's already far ahead, leaving too few votes for B and C, causing the Old Party to win a 4-1 legislative majority. If, however, the New Party's votes had an even 20-20-20 split, they'd win three seats instead of one. The purpose of vote allocation is to coordinate an even split like that. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
