On Dec 6, 2006, at 4:33 , MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote: > There was later another bill to enact > LR/Hamilton. It passed and wasn't vetored, and LR/Hamilton was used > for a > while--till someone pointed out the bizarre paradoxes that it's > subject to: > Some people move from another staste to your state, causing your > state to > lose a seat. We add a seat to the House, and that causes your state > to lose > a seat. When that was pointed out, LR/Hamilton was immediately > repealed and > discarded. (IRVists please take note).
I understand that LR/Hamilton may lead to the Alabama paradox and people may dislike LR/Hamilton because of this. But I think LR/ Hamilton is quite proportional and unbiased. Are there other reasons why LR/Hamilton is not favoured? SL/Webster is close to LR/Hamilton and avoids the Alabama paradox, but LR/Hamilton might still be considered more exact in providing proportionality. Juho Laatu Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
