On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Kathy Dopp <[email protected]> wrote: > No. I believe that Cincinnati wants a fair equitable voting method > that is publicly transparent and were smart enough to realize what an > utter unfair mess the IRV/STV voting method is, and also recognized > that STV/IRV methods tend to keep the top two parties in power by > ensuring that minority parties cannot interfere unless the minority > gets large enough to cause the elimination of the most popular > two-party candidate, causing the least favorite two party candidate to > win.
PR-STV with multi-seat constituencies is an extremely effective system at putting the voters in control. In Ireland, there are even complaints that it gives to much power to the voters. >> I am afraid you have confused me here. The best way to provide >> representation for a geographically dispersed minority is to elect as many >> embers as possible "at large" (e.g. the whole city council). It is then up >> to that minority to make sure they all vote for the candidate(s) who best >> represents their views. If that minority is large enough to secure 1/Nth of >> the votes (or 1/(N+1)th of the votes in STV-PR), then that minority will >> obtain one seat, or more in due proportion to their votes. > > Yes. That is exactly what I said. But you are recommending that minority representation is dependent on gerrymandering? ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
