On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 6:01 AM, Raph Frank <raph...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think it would be possible but you would have to have to have a few columns > for each round.
A lot more than a few. Try to do it with even 1/2 or 1/3 of all the possible ballot ranking combinations and a few candidates in a way that a newbie could just plop in new results and get an answer. > > However, PR-STV is a sequential system, which is harder to implement with > spreadsheets. Virtually impossible to automate in a way that novices could simply plug in the number for any STV election contest for any number of candidates and ballot orderings. Prove me wrong if you can, but I doubt that you'll be able to unless you use a programming language that is also opaque to most people. > Are you opposed to any kind of PR system? Only if you believe that all PR systems only allow voters to cast one ranked or rated ballot for casting a vote for a multi-seat at-large contest. Voters should always be able to fill out as many separate votes as the number of candidates that they are allowed to vote into office. If two at-large seats, then two separate votes, ranked, rated, or plurality. > > Party list systems are (mostly) monotonic. Do not know what "Party list systems" are, but all plurality elections are monotonic. > The only time your 2nd choice won't be looked at is if you vote for the last > candidate to be eliminated as your first choice, Yes, so that can be a very large group of voters whose 2nd choices are never considered even though their 1st choice loses and is one of several inequities that causes IRV/STV to have such undesirable outcomes. > In any case, in an N seat election, up to 1/(N+1) of the voters will not have > a candidate who represents them. In a single seat More than that with IRV/STV election process unless you redefine the term "voters" to only include voters left standing in the final counting round - as most IRV/STV proponents do. BTW, the process you describe below is very unlike PR-STV because voters may revote based on prior voting rounds' outcomes, but it is also very unfair as it allows only some voters to revote. > PR-STV is designed to be similar to a process you could follow in a town > meeting like situation. > > 1) Each voter votes for 1 candidate > 2) Work out the Droop quota > 3) If any candidate exceeds the quota, that candidate is appointed to the > committee > -- Select some of the voters (equal to the surplus) who voted for the > candidate and allow them to move their vote > (This selection could be made at random, or by deweighting all of those > people's votes) 4) If no candidate reached the quota, eliminate the candidate > with the > fewest votes > -- Allow those voters to move their vote to other candidates > -- Kathy Dopp The material expressed herein is the informed product of the author's fact-finding and investigative efforts. Dopp is a Mathematician, Expert in election audit mathematics and procedures; in exit poll discrepancy analysis; and can be reached at P.O. Box 680192 Park City, UT 84068 phone 435-658-4657 http://utahcountvotes.org http://electionmathematics.org http://kathydopp.com/serendipity/ Post-Election Vote Count Audit A Short Legislative & Administrative Proposal http://electionmathematics.org//ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/Vote-Count-Audit-Bill-2009.pdf History of Confidence Election Auditing Development & Overview of Election Auditing Fundamentals http://electionarchive.org/ucvAnalysis/US/paper-audits/History-of-Election-Auditing-Development.pdf Voters Have Reason to Worry http://utahcountvotes.org/UT/UtahCountVotes-ThadHall-Response.pdf ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info