2012/2/2 Stephen Unger <un...@cs.columbia.edu> > >> A fundamental problem with all these fancy schemes is vote >> tabulation. All but approval are sufficiently complex to make manual >> processing messy, to the point where even checking the reported >> results of a small fraction of the precincts becomes a cumbersome, >> costly operation. (Score/range voting might be workable). Note that, >> even with plurality voting, manual recounts are rare. With any of the >> other schemes we would be committed to faith-based elections. >> >> Steve >> > > I wanted to mention that Approval-voting enhanced IRV and STV could be tabulated at the precinct level. You let everyone rank up to 3 candidates and then you use these rankings to get 3 finalists. You then sort the votes into ten possible ways people could rank the 3 finalists. But if the third or fourth most often ranked candidates were within a small percent of each other then it would not require a manual recount. The IRV cd be done with two sets of 3 candidates so there'd be twice as much sorting in the 2nd round and then there'd be a manual recount if and only if there's a different outcome in the two sets of candidates, which is not likely.
dlw
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
