yes, that's it.
P.
2013/2/6 Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_el...@lavabit.com:
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,
James, Jonathan,
I need that the quoted-in people are quoted-in in such a way, that the
proportionality of the election is not significantly disturbed.
I think Rosenthiel's approach has the following insufficiencies:
If I elect five women, and then increase the number of elected seats
until two
Kristofer,
to be more exact:
I need not just proportionality in the ordered list as a whole (i.e.
meaning proportional ranking), but also that seats/candidates are
quoted in proportionally within each gender too.
Proportionality within each gender is not needed, if the constraints are met.
Is there a quota or gender requirement or both requirements?
- If we assume that the quota rules are not needed since both genders will get
seats also otherwise, is it ok if one grouping gets 3 women and the other one 2
men?
- Is it ok if the second seat goes to a male candidate of some
On 6.2.2013, at 12.29, Juho Laatu wrote:
- Is it ok if the second seat goes to a male candidate of some grouping and
the fifth seat goes to a female candidate of the same grouping?
Clarification: In the second and fifth seats the quota rule forced the sex to
be changed.
Juho
STV is not my personal favorite PR rule (my favorites are Bucklin
Transferrable Vote or PAL Representation, and Schulze PR is also better
than STV). However, if you're starting from STV, the way to do the quota is
clear. When the quota makes one gender ineligible for a seat, simply ignore
that
My concern had been that, in IRV, a party, in order to gain
media-support, might instruct its voters to rank, in 2nd place, a
media-promoted party's candidate.
But there are several reasons why that shouldn't be a problem in the
Green scenario.
1. With the open media offered in the Green
Jameson,
I am not sure if we understand each other here.
I am looking for an election system, where the quoted-in seat gives
(or moves toward) a proportional distribution of the quoted-in gender.
If we fix the seats which will be quoted-in at no. 2 and 5, the
quoted-in gender will in some cases
Hi Kristofer,
to be even more exact and correct:
I need not just proportionality in the ordered list as a whole (i.e.
meaning proportional ranking), but also that seats/candidates are
quoted in proportionally, i.e. that the quoted-in candidates are
proportionally distributed.
That should be the
2013/2/6 Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com
Jameson,
I am not sure if we understand each other here.
I am looking for an election system, where the quoted-in seat gives
(or moves toward) a proportional distribution of the quoted-in gender.
If we fix the seats which will be quoted-in at no. 2
On 02/06/2013 08:56 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
2013/2/6 Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com mailto:pzbor...@gmail.com
Jameson,
I am not sure if we understand each other here.
I am looking for an election system, where the quoted-in seat gives
(or moves toward) a proportional
No, only one election, please, no meta-elections. Two elections would
take too much time.
Thanks for your understanding.
PZ
2013/2/6 Kristofer Munsterhjelm km_el...@lavabit.com:
On 02/06/2013 08:56 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
2013/2/6 Peter Zbornik pzbor...@gmail.com mailto:pzbor...@gmail.com
Say twenty, for instance.
We might have situations, where we will fill for instance 12 seats
(quotas for each triple of seats) and have 30 candidates, as an
extreme case.
I wanted to focus on the most important case, which is the top five seats.
The 12 seats/30 candidates case is an extreme, if
Although you do not appear to favour STV-PR to address your problem, I should
have made it clear in my post, copied below, that
there is only ONE election. That is to determine the set of successful
candidates who have to be ordered for the list. There is
then a succession of COUNTS of the
14 matches
Mail list logo
