On Apr 26, 2010, at 4:45 PM, Juho wrote:

> Draft of a method:
> 
> - collect ranked votes
> - use Condorcet to determine P (Condorcet tends to elect a compromise 
> candidate that all voters find reasonably good)
> - use STV (using the same ballots) to elect the group of P and VPs (some 
> special rules are needed to guarantee that the already named P will not be 
> eliminated in the process but will be elected)
> - use STV (using the same ballots) to elect members of the board (some 
> special rules are needed to guarantee that the already named P and VPs will 
> not be eliminated in the process but will be elected)
> 
> One could elect P and VPs also later. In that case one could elect them from 
> the members of the (already existing) board. Otherwise the process would be 
> similar.

This is a better approach, I think. Protecting already-elected members and 
preserving proportionality is a subtle problem, and I don't think there's a 
completely satisfactory solution available. It's defensible for filling 
vacancies (below), but when it can be avoided, it should be. (Unless someone 
has a great idea for this kind of countback.)

A burial strategy for P would have unfortunate effects for the STV election, is 
a possible problem.

> 
> If one needs to elect new members to the board to replace old ones one could 
> use the old ballots + special rules that will not eliminate any of the 
> sitting board members.
> 
> Does this work? Is this practical? Can this be considered to be 
> understandable and well tested? Are there some strategic opportunities? Does 
> this maintain proportionality as it should? Any conflicts with the 
> expectations and needs of the Czech Green party?


----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

Reply via email to