Meek's method elects A, C1 & C2 in this example.
On Apr 19, 2007, at 10:18 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was thinking about an easier solution to the vote management
problem.
This is where it is sometimes in a party's interests to try to
split their support
equally between two candidate due to exhausted ballots. In effect,
they
get a candidate elected without a quota.
For example, assume a 3 seat election and 4 candidates.
12500: A
9000: B
18500: (C1,C2)
Voters might vote
12500: A
9000: B>C1>C2>A
12000: C1>C2
6500: C2>C1
Quota is 10000 (approx)
Round 1: A is elected, all his votes are exhasted
A: 12500 *
B: 9000
C:1 12000
C2: 6500
Round 2: C1 is elected and votes transfer to C2
A: 10000*
B: 9000
C1: 10000*
C2: 8500
B then wins the last seat as C2 is eliminated.
However, if C1 and C2 had evenly split their 18500 votes, they
would have won both
seats as they would have had 9250 votes each and B would have been
eliminated first.
This causes parties to participate in 'vote management', the effect
of which is that it is
no longer tactically correct to just rank the candidates in order
of your choice.
The best solution would be to re-calculate the quota after each
round. However, this
would greatly complicate the counting process (especially if it was
hand counted).
However, really all that is needed is to recalculate the quota once
at the end.
The rule would activate when
a) there is no candidate with a surplus to distribute
b) the number of uneliminated candidates is one greater than the
seats to allocate
The quota is recalculated and surplus transferred to one of the
remaining
2 unelected candidates.
Round 3 would change to:
Quota recalculated: (10000+9000+10000+8500)/4=9375
A: 9375 (transfers 625 and they exhaust)
B: 9000 (below quota)
C1: 9375 (transfers 625 to C2)
C2: 9125 (625 transferred in)
Ideally, this should be repeated until it converges. In fact, it
is probably
relatively easy to work out mathematically what the final result
would be
without actually counting the additional rounds.
Anyway, the result is that C2 has more votes than B and is thus
elected. This
eliminates the tactical benefit to voters who participate in vote
management,
which allows them to be honest. It has the additional benefit that
all elected
candidates represent the same number of voters (at least all the
ones who
come from the same district).
Raphfrk
--------------------
Interesting site
"what if anyone could modify the laws"
www.wikocracy.com
Check Out the new free AIM(R) Mail -- 2 GB of storage and industry-
leading spam and email virus protection.
----
election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for
list info
----
election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
