On Apr 28, 2010, at 5:34 PM, Raph Frank wrote:
On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 4:47 AM, Juho <[email protected]> wrote:
You assume that there is only one VP.
Well, if more than 1 VP is possible, then the election could be
- Elect council with PR-STV
- The condorcet winner (only including the councillors) is President
- Elect 2 of the councilors as VPs using PR-STV
In this case the VPs are elected in a proportional way but one of them
could be from the same grouping as the P (not in line with the
requirements that I assumed).
However, there is still the question of what exactly the VPs and
President is supposed to do.
I understood that the P and VPs could be the leader of the party and
her "deputies". I understood that the same method could be used also
at lower layers.
If they are to chair council meetings, then it is better to just
elect them.
We could have also two and keep track
of which members are elected first, second and third.
I still disagree with using order of election in a PR-STV election.
It provides an additional incentive for dishonest rankings.
If I understood you correctly, I agree that use of the election order
of the council members is not a good criterion when electing the VPs
and/or P. Number of votes of each elected candidate at the end of the
election would be one step better. There was also the problem of the
distorting effect of the different quota in the P+VPs election and the
council election.
Note btw that also use of CPO-STV may be possible in this kind of
small elections.
It would have most of the same problems that plurality has where you
need to vote for one of the top-2.
Do you mean that voters would concentrate on the first rankings and
strongest candidates? The used method should be such that this kind of
behaviour will not be rational.
Juho
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
