On May 4, 2010, at 3:19 PM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
Dear Juho,
just some words to avoid misunderstandings.
I still would like to be able to propose an alternative method,
which elects the council first and then the P and VPs, even though
the condorcet winner is not in there (marked as the "optimal" method
(28.4.2010)).
I guess this is what Schulze calls the bottom-up approach.
The top-down approach has the problem of sacrificing proportionality
and the bottom-up approach has the problem of sometimes not electing
the president.
Considering the fact that the current election system of the greens
is closer to top-down than bottom-up, a top-down system seems to be
more likely to pass.
I think you can also try to achieve most of both approaches. If same
ballots can be used for P and VP and council elections then the
election of the president is not limited to the members of the
council. Timewise the And the council can be almost as proportional as
when elected independently (since the elected president is likely to
be elected also in the council anyway). It may be useful to have some
space for discussion and maybe different alternatives when discussing
the proposal(s) within the party, but there is no need to cover (or
emphasize) alternatives that the members may not like. For strategic
reasons it may however be useful to include one proposal that all are
likely to hate and that has some obvious flaws. That would make the
better proposals automatically more liked :-).
Juho
Both approaches seem to be appealing.
James Gilmour (4.5.2010) showed an example of a bottom-up method
using STV.
Best regards
Peter Zborník
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
