Juho wrote:
Simple question, simple answer. Use lists between parties (or other
groupings) and candidate ranking within them. Open lists try to
implement proportionality within the lists in one quite primitive way.
Use of candidate ranking within the parties allows us to offer also
proper party internal proportionality.
It seems easy enough to generalize, at least given how proportional
ordering methods have been mentioned lately:
- Each voter votes for a list, and can rank this list if he wants to.
- Once the election is done, the authority calculates the number of
seats given to each party, as well as a proportional ordering for each
party.
- Each party gets the top n candidates on its proportional ordering,
where n is the number of seats allocated to that party.
A more complex version might give the party itself some say in the
ordering; e.g. the voters' ballots may count as 75% of total while the
predefined party order counts as 25% of total. If the percentages are 0
and 100 respectively, you have ordinary closed list.
(Yet another approach would be to have the party order count as a fixed
*number* of ballots - if few people bother to rank, the party order is
strong so that it can counter the noise of the few ballots that have
been submitted, while if many people do, there's less noise and so the
err-default rank should matter less.)
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
