Peter Zbornik wrote:
Dear all,
please consider including a list of endorsed election methods for
proportional elections, just as you have done for single winner
elections. Otherwise the bold statement will just cover one special case
in election theory - single winner elections.
Furthermore you might consider covering the issues of
(i) proportional rank orders. For instance when electing the party list
in primaries, in countries where closed lists are used.
(ii) proportional rank orders to elect a hierarchy of functions
proportionally, like board president, vice presidents and other board
members.
I think it would be better to have a separate statement for details
about multiwinner methods than to put everything into one grand
document, so as not to burden the latter too greatly. The statement
we're considering now could have details about what single-winner
methods we agree to support and then say "just about all multiwinner
methods but closed list", then, if necessary, have another statement
that mentions proportional rank orders, STV/QPQ/Schulze STV, open list,
and so on.
Perhaps it would be enough to say "anything but closed list" and be done
without needing a second statement, as multiwinner methods have the
advantage of multiple seats to even out strange results that would
otherwise make for a bad method. On the other hand, it may be useful to
have a common position on semiproportional methods (SNTV, parallel
voting and limited vote systems, and so on).
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
