I'd like comment more about this statement, because it it's typical of
Richard's pattern:
[quote]
Another concern is that some people following this forum will believe
all (or most) of what Michael says simply because currently he is so
prolific, and because he sounds like he understands election
On 02/05/2013 12:52 AM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
Kristoffer,
no the example below applies for my two-round proposal as well, thus
rapidly sinking what I previously proposed :o)
Nice to having had done away with the two-round variant of IRV.
Now I don't have to bother about it any more.
For
On 5 Feb 2013, at 9:50 AM, Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
We recently managed, after some effort to elect some people in our
party using STV (five of seven board members of the Czech Green Party
and more recently some people to lead the Prague organisation etc.).
We used
2013/2/5 Jonathan Lundell jlund...@pobox.com:
On 5 Feb 2013, at 9:50 AM, Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear all,
We recently managed, after some effort to elect some people in our
party using STV (five of seven board members of the Czech Green Party
and more recently some people to
On 5 Feb 2013, at 10:23 AM, Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com wrote:
Say the default proportional ranking method elects women to all five
seats, and thus that we need to modify it in a good way in order to
satisfy the constraints.
Now the question is: How should the quoted seats be
In Jun-2010, Britain's parliament used STV with two constraints to elect 3
deputy speakers.
One constraint was that 2 of the 3 winners must be Labour MPs.
The other constraint was that at least one of the 3 winners must be a woman.
On 02/05/2013 06:50 PM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
Dear all,
We recently managed, after some effort to elect some people in our
party using STV (five of seven board members of the Czech Green Party
and more recently some people to lead the Prague organisation etc.).
We used standard fractional STV,
On 02/05/2013 06:50 PM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
The problem (after a slight simplification) is as follows:
We want to elect five seats with any proportional ranking method (like
Schulze proportional ranking, or Otten's top-down or similar), using
the Hagenbach-Bischoff quota
Hi Kristofer,
I am afraid your approach might in some cases not lead to
proportionally distributed quoted-in candidates.
For instance, say we have three coalitions: A, B, C.
Coalition A and B get their first place candidate
Coalition C get their second place candidate quoted-in (i.e. they
would
Hi Kristofer,
I am sending a short P.S. to my email below just to clarify the example
In the example in my email below we get the following result:
Seat/place number (ordered) --- Coalition --- quotas apply
1 --- A, B --- no
2 --- C --- yes
3 --- A --- no
4 --- B --- no
5 --- C --- yes
The
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
On 02/05/2013 09:37 PM, Peter Zbornik wrote:
Hi Kristofer,
I am afraid your approach might in some cases not lead to
proportionally distributed quoted-in candidates.
For instance, say we have three coalitions: A, B, C.
Coalition A and B get their first place candidate
Coalition C get their
12 matches
Mail list logo
