Frank, just one comment: Vote management is very common in our party. And yes, we have voters often split up in groups, or factions. Peter
On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 8:37 PM, Raph Frank <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 5:46 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > In particular, such a highly proportional method is more > > likely to be vulnerable to strategic voting. > > In what way? > > > Personally I regard resistance to strategic voting to be > > very important, and it should not be neglected just to > > achieve what on the surface appears to be highly > > proportional results. > > "Vote management" is the main strategic issue with PR-STV and > Schulze's method is designed to be resistant. > > This shouldn't be a big issue for elections within a party. It > requires voters to be split up into groups and vote according to > instructions. I would hope that if a candidate tried to organise > that, there would be a negative reaction within the party. > Even with basic PR-STV, I don't think this is a major issue for > internal party elections. > > > Another way to express this is to say that, as a voter, I > > would rather choose to elect a competent leader whose > > political views are slightly different than mine, rather > > than elect a less-competent politician who claims to > > represent the party I most prefer. > > I agree, but that is what PR-STV allows you to do. You rank the > candidates in order of your choice. > > You can decide how to balance competence and political alignment. > Other votes might decide on a different trade-off. > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info >
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
