> Jonathan Lundell > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 6:40 PM > There is, I think, an underlying misconception here, namely > that STV order of election can be interpreted as a ranking of > level of support. It's not, in the general case.
Jonathan is absolutely right. If you want lists ordered by relative support, you need to adopt a procedure like that recommended by Colin Rosenstiel and used by some UK political parties when they have to select ordered lists for closed-list party-PR elections. First you use ordinary STV-PR to elect the required total number of candidates. Then you conduct a series of STV-PR elections, each for one vacancy less than the preceding election. The unsuccessful candidate takes the lowest vacant place on the ordered list. Continue until you run-off between the top-two for the second-last place. For full details, see: http://www.crosenstiel.webspace.virginmedia.com/stv/orderstv.htm and http://www.crosenstiel.webspace.virginmedia.com/stv/ordstvdt.htm The second one includes a constraint for candidate's sex. James Gilmour --- avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean. Virus Database (VPS): 130205-0, 05/02/2013 Tested on: 05/02/2013 23:49:22 avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2013 AVAST Software. http://www.avast.com ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
