On Apr 16, 2007, at 9:56 AM, Bob Richard wrote: > The (alleged) complexity of STV is entirely a matter of the counting > process; the task for the voter is actually very simple. Having said > that, the conventional ways of explaining the count invariably lose > audiences, and we need to learn how to present it better.
Yes, yes, yes, to all of that. I'll add (from experience with internal Green Party elections) that a big piece of the complexity argument is lack of familiarity. As we've increasingly used STV, I find that voters become familiar--and comfortable--with the concept, even though few of them could explain the counting mechanism. A caution, though: when adopting STV, it's important to fully specify the method. Our biggest confusions have been over ambiguities in our rules, which can lead to conflicting results. ---- election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
