limits are imposed because of the limitations of the out-of-date
equipment used to tally paper ballots.
James Gilmour
Edinburgh, Scotland
---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 130624-1, 24/06/2013
Tested on: 24/06/2013 17:17:08
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2013 AVAST
: James Gilmour [mailto:jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 11:49 PM
To: 'Jonathan Lundell'; 'Peter Zbornik'
Cc: 'election-meth...@electorama.com'
Subject: RE: [EM] proportional constraints - help needed
Jonathan Lundell Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 6:40
PM
://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
government councils. Details
of the numbers of preferences marked, by ward and by ballot box (= Polling
Station = part of a Polling District), are available on the 32 websites of the
councils. The full ballot data (preference profiles) for all 353 wards will be
available early in 2013.
James
to be
properly representative of those who vote.
Both of these defects has greater effect if the electorates are not so equal or
if the turnouts vary with party support (as they
certainly do in the UK).
So even when there are only two parties, FPTP is very far from fine.
James Gilmour
-
No virus
what is the scenario with two parties where FPTP is so flawed?
Only if you think that
third parties and independents should nor run, and there
should be only two parties, then Plurality is fine.
On 4.6.2012, at 13.49, James Gilmour wrote:
These contributions to this discussion
(of various kinds) in some sub-UK elections. The two things
are not at all related and certainly had nothing to
do with preparing any imaged climate for the AV referendum.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
of our STV-PR package
- that's practical politics. But that reform has
transformed our local government - no more one-party states.
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
the proportionality - in a way that Droop
does not. Why anyone would want to restrict the
voting system to 3-seat districts instead of adopting a flexible approach to
district magnitude to fit local geography and
recognised communities..
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election
David L Wetzell Sent: Friday, February 17, 2012 7:31 PM
James Gilmour: But why would you want all these differences
and complications?
dlw: Because context matters.
I have great difficulty in believing that there are such context specific
differences. I could believe
Juho LaatuSent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 8:29 PM
I think I agree when I say that the first decision (in the
USA) is whether to make the current two-party system work
better or whether to aim at a multi-party system.
Juho
Don't you think you might just be starting in the wrong
Juho LaatuSent: Thursday, February 09, 2012 8:07 PM
As I earlier wrote, I think the US has many options on how to
go forward with the reform. The presidential election is
maybe the most interesting one.
Juho
This may be the most interesting election, but as it is almost certainly the
. No improvement of the voting system
used to elect these members from single-member
districts is going to deliver real improvement of the representation of the
voters.
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun
/ordstvdt.htm
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf Of Peter Zbornik
Sent: Sunday, November 27, 2011 10:55 AM
To: Election Methods; election-methods
Subject: [EM] STV and single
-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On Behalf Of Juho Laatu
Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2011 5:11 PM
To: EM
Subject: Re: [EM] Proportional, Accountable,Local (PAL) representation: isn't
this a big deal?
On 29.10.2011, at 16.58, James Gilmour wrote:
Kristofer Munsterhjelm Sent: Saturday
elections per se. That's why
I'm puzzled.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
to
elect the Condorcet winner may have added some
theoretical fuel to the flames in the campaign to ditch IRV, but the real
impetus came from those who wanted to go back to FPTP with
top-two run-off when the front-runner didn't achieve the artificial threshold.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods
-insoluble problems of obtaining (and
measuring) the best representation in single-winner
elections had been directed to that more practical objective.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Kristofer MunsterhjelmSent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 10:22 PM
James Gilmour wrote:
You are right, so far as I am aware - there have never been any
Condorcet public elections anywhere in the world. That in itself
should tell us something as the Condorcet voting system has
ineffective in
the discharge of the office to which s/he was elected.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
it is
sometimes a requirement to elect against the majority opinion.
This sounds more like (benign) dictatorship than democratic representation.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
,
such a result would be less acceptable to the electors than the plurality
result, despite all the obvious defects in the plurality
voting. That's just how it is - and if you want to achieve real, practical
reform, you have to understand that.
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election
in IRV is that it can, sometimes, fail to elect the Condorcet winner.
But IRV avoids the political problem of the weak
Condorcet winner. I suspect that's why IRV has been accepted for many public
and semi-public elections despite the Condorcet flaw.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list
in the
UK would object to that?
I cannot think of ANYONE in the UK who would support a proposal for any form of
two-round voting for public elections.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
robert bristow-johnson Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 7:00 PM
On 9/22/11 12:40 PM, James Gilmour wrote:
But suppose the votes had been (again ignoring irrelevant
preferences):
48 AC
47 BC
5 C
C is still the Condorcet winner - no question about that. But I
doubt
cycles (and there still isn't). I
suspect the specific issue of the weak Condorcet winner may not then have
been too significant because no-one suggested using a
Condorcet system. But that would certainly be an issue now, given the nature
of our current politics.
James Gilmour
Election
Toby PereiraSent: Thursday, September 22, 2011 8:11 PM
From: James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk
But suppose the votes had been (again ignoring irrelevant preferences):
48 AC
47 BC
5 C
C is still the Condorcet winner - no question about that. But I
doubt whether
what
is wrong with such two-round voting systems.
I would say runoff
elections are the standard way of conducting single member
elections. Even though I have no data for this claim,
Yes, I should like to see some hard data to back up that statement.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods
opinion polls; for the USA and
Canada it is based on my reading of local media and blogs.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
calculations.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Juho Laatu Sent: Thursday, August 04, 2011 5:12 PM
On 4.8.2011, at 14.21, James Gilmour wrote:
There is only one real issue in elections: representation of the
voters.
If in a single winner partisan election the voters vote 51% for A and
49% for B, we have a major problem
have wider
support than in the typical 51+% governments of a two-party
system. The larger government would have to make compromises
that are at least acceptable to all parties in the government.
Juho
On 6.8.2011, at 17.39, James Gilmour wrote:
Juho Laatu Sent: Thursday, August 04
in single-winner methods.
Juho
On 3.8.2011, at 19.35, James Gilmour wrote:
Juho Laatu Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:04 AM
Multi-winner methods are, if possible, even more complicated
than single-winner methods.
I disagree. It is much easier to obtain a satisfactory
of the problems disappear.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
Juho Laatu Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 10:35 AM
After some recent discussions and thoughts around two-party
systems I thought it would be interesting to discuss
two-party systems also in a more positive spirit. The
assumption is thus that we want the system to be two-party
oriented.
. The
concepts are quite different.
James
Juho Laatu Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 2:53 PM
On 9.7.2011, at 16.14, James Gilmour wrote:
Juho Laatu Sent: Saturday, July 09, 2011 10:35 AM
After some recent discussions and thoughts around two-party
systems I thought it would
Kathy Dopp Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 2:30 AM
On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 7:19 PM, James Gilmour
Kathy, your comments illustrate the fundamental problems with all
party list voting systems: 1. you must have registered political
parties;
As someone else noted in this thread already
the way and apply your chosen PR system to all candidates
across all parties? That would give the voters real
choice and would also avoid completely the problem of entrenching the political
power of the parties' machines.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http
Juho Laatu Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 4:30 PM
(Of course the idea of having proportionally ordered
candidate lists in a closer list election would make voting
in the actual election even simpler. But then one would need
to have a primary to find the ordering for each party.)
But that
Jameson Quinn Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 5:03 PM
As I said in my last message, asset-like systems can let you
have your cake and eat it, if you trust your favorite
candidate to agree with you in ranking other candidates. This
is fundamentally different from trusting your party, because
Kathy Dopp Sent: Monday, July 04, 2011 10:40 PM
James, As someone on this list already pointed out, such a
system as you suggest does *nothing* to ensure
proportionality *within* the party list because the list of
candidates could all have been chosen by either the leaders
or the
offer themselves for election) and not
just PR of the registered political parties. There are
historical reasons why different countries have favoured one approach over the
other, reflecting, and reflected in, differences in
political culture.
James Gilmour
Scotland (where we use 5 different voting
You have missed the point completely, ignoring issues of illiteracy (25% of
adults) and disability and discrimination.
It is simpler to rank candidates 1, 2, 3, 4, etc or to rate them on a
1 to 7 scale with the options in seven clear
columns than to engage in any combinatorial addition.
JG
in designing for
public elections.
James Gilmour
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
to determine the
appropriate numbers of councillors for the councils that serve the 32 very
different local government areas within Scotland:
http://www.lgbc-scotland.gov.uk/reviews/councillor_numbers_2011/
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun
-Commission-Ballot-Paper-Testing-Summary-Final-Report.pdfsearch_referer=
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf Of Steve Wolfman
Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:53 PM
On 27.5.2011, at 10.01, Jameson Quinn wrote:
1. We draw up a statement which details the serious problems
with plurality in the US context, and states that there are
solutions.
Juho Laatu Sent: Friday, May 27, 2011 9:43 PM
Good approach. I have one comment on the target statement.
Kristofer Munsterhjelm Sent: Monday, February 28, 2011 1:18 PM
James Gilmour wrote:
Kristofer Munsterhjelm Sent: Friday, February 25, 2011 2:29 PM
I'm not a UK politics expert, but it seems this is a minimal concession,
of the sort one would see in negotiation. AV/IRV doesn't really
very different kinds of elected member, brings a
raft of new problems which would be high price to pay
for party PR. We have MMP in the Scottish Parliament (we call it AMS), but we
want to change to STV-PR.
James Gilmour
-
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version
a polarizing candidate, it is surely not for anyone to
have the power to over-ride that democratic decision.
Or have I missed something?
James Gilmour
-Original Message-
From: election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-boun...@lists.electorama.com] On
Behalf
Kristofer Munsterhjelm Sent: Thursday, June 17, 2010 9:58 AM
In a parliamentary system, I imagine it would be possible for the party
leadership to decide (in the manner that they decide a list under party
list PR). How do parties in actual single-winner district parliamentary
countries
, the total number of
candidates would likely be less that the present
total of 31 because none of the four main parties would nominate 5 candidates.
We already use STV-PR for public elections within the UK and it works very
well. STV-PR should adopted for the UK Parliament as
well.
James Gilmour
to adopt closed-list party-list PR voting
systems for any elections (public or private), but such ordered-list voting
systems have been imposed on us by UK governments and so
the parties must produce the ordered lists if they wish to participate in these
elections.
James Gilmour
No virus found
Elections in two Australian states have just been held.
In Tasmania, the lower House of Assembly elected by PR-STV has 25 seats in 5 x
5-seat constituencies, so gives good proportional
representation.
See
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/tas/2010/
and
http://www.electoral.tas.gov.au
In South
robert bristow-johnson wrote:
It seems that what Fairvote want is PR-STV.
The hope is presumably, that if they can get voters used to
ranked ballots and eliminations with IRV, they can then argue
that moving onto PR-STV is just changing to the multiseat
version of IRV.
Surely a major
Raph Frank Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2010 11:01 PM
In relation to the Swiss Federal Parliament election system
It is like a cumulative voting version of MMP, but there is
no mechanism for a candidate to win without being a member of a party.
No, it's not at all like MMP. In MMP half or
Raph Frank Sent: Wednesday, March 24, 2010 5:31 PM
Sorry, I wasn't clear at all.
No, it certainly wasn't clear.
I was thinking of the decoy
list issue with MMP.
I don't think this is at all a helpful way of looking at the Swiss CN voting
system.
What I meant was that it is like MMP in
or the Sainte-Laguë formula to the votes,
summed over the apparentenement partner-parties as necessary.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.791 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2762 - Release Date: 03/21/10
19:33:00
Election-Methods
political
system. In some political cultures voters already think the political parties
are too dominant.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2743 - Release Date: 03/13/10
07:33:00
Election-Methods
elections are affected by successful incumbent gerrymandering
and by the effect of primary elections. I suspect that
if these two distorting effects were removed, you would see a very different
picture, much like that from FPTP elections in Canada
or in the UK.
James Gilmour
No virus found
to determine the
winner (or winners in an STV-PR election). That what
has been done for public elections in Ireland and the UK for many decades and
it works well without problems. But I do appreciate
that is far too simple and practical a solution and it suffers from NMH.
James Gilmour
No virus
not have any details and I have never been involved in timetabling so I
don't know how well these approaches work in
practice.)
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.730 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2644 - Release Date: 01/25/10
07:36:00
robert bristow-johnson Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 12:25 AM
On Jan 21, 2010, at 7:05 PM, James Gilmour wrote:
N Unique Preference Profiles
2 4
3 15
...
then your calculation is mistaken. the fact that you
ostensibly need
4 piles when there are only two candidates should
unoffVotingFlaws.pdf
Because it's hard to write a summation, fraction formula,
etc. here I'll let you look it up. It's on page 6 of the doc
linked above.
Cheers,
Kathy
From: James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk
I do not intend to comment on your formula, but I calculate the
numbers
Kathy Dopp Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 1:42 PM
OK James. As I said before, I agree with you that you were
giving the total number of profiles *if* voters were allowed
to rank all candidates, which they were not allowed to do in
Minneapolis or elsewhere in the US public elections if I
Kathy Dopp Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 4:54 PM
James, you are using a straw man argument with me, setting up
a false premise that I said something I never did,
Kathy, I was not setting up any straw man argument with you or anyone else. I
simply stated what a preference profile is and
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax Sent: Friday, January 22, 2010 5:53 PM
At 03:57 AM 1/22/2010, James Gilmour wrote:
This
second set of rules are those that prescribe the transfer of votes
to the bitter end, i.e. even after the winners have all been
determined. Under this rule a ballot marked A would
of candidates.
I understand the full preference profiles, probably at precinct level, will be
published on the City website, but they are not there
yet.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.730 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2636 - Release
are:
A
B
A B
B A
Anything that does not conform to this is an incorrect use of the term
preference profile.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.730 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2636 - Release Date: 01/21/10
07:34:00
in any other way.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.86/2533 - Release Date: 11/28/09
19:34:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
for these elections.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.81/2524 - Release Date: 11/24/09
19:37:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
then I think it'd be better just to have the
filter on the decision process itself.
Why in any country that would merit the description democracy would you want
to impose a two-party system when the votes of the
voters showed that was not what they wanted?
James Gilmour
No virus found
Kristofer Munsterhjelm Sent: Tuesday, November 03, 2009 4:34 PM
James Gilmour wrote:
Why in any country that would merit the description democracy would
you want to impose a two-party system when the votes of the voters
showed that was not what they wanted?
That is my question, too
the elected members and their
parties, and between the elected assembly and the
executive, especially where the executive is based within the assembly (as in
parliamentary system). These political effects
(beyond simple PR) are important considerations, especially from the voters'
perspective.
James
. Then there is no discrimination of the
kind you describe between these voters.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.42/2473 - Release Date: 10/31/09
21:14:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http
branch of policy: economic,
social, educational, health, etc, etc.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.44/2475 - Release Date: 11/01/09
19:39:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http
is not as unrepresentative as most
assemblies elected in this way around the world (e.g. UK, Canada). That's
probably why Federal electoral reform is not higher up
the public agenda in the USA.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database
- currently a majority of 66 seats (out of 646)
with only 35% of the votes. But that's party
politics!
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2469 - Release Date: 10/30/09
07:52:00
Election-Methods
, better vision of politics and the police system, you will
want to empower the voters, and that's what STV-PR could
do.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.698 / Virus Database: 270.14.39/2469 - Release Date: 10/30/09
07:52:00
On Mon, Sep 14, 2009 at 4:19 PM, James Gilmour wrote:
The 'count back' procedure with STV-PR provides an alternative
approach to the principle of preserving the proportionality determined
at the previous main election. Then the voters would get the
proportionality they would have got
to filling casual vacancies has
delighted the SNP but sent shockwaves through the Labour Party.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.409 / Virus Database: 270.13.94/2367 - Release Date: 09/14/09
05:51:00
Election-Methods mailing list
:17 AM
James Gilmour wrote:
It is extremely important to refer to STV as the SINGLE Transferable
Vote, because each voter must have only one vote to ensure PR. This
distinguishes STV from all multiple vote systems, like
Multi-Member-FPTP or the Cumulative Vote. It is also important
in an attempt to overcome the deficiencies of
a voting system designed for a completely different
purpose?
James Gilmour
Brian Olson Sent: Saturday, July 18, 2009 2:39 PM
As this isn't something I really want it's going to be hard to get
motivated to work it out.
That said I think the way to go
.
Incidentally, we call this tactical voting, when the voter votes insincerely
in response to the local political situation. We use
strategic voting for situations where they vote insincerely in response to
some feature of the voting system itself.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message
2009/6/4 James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk
Markus, UK electors have no hope of understanding that
question at all after any campaign, never mind not instantly.
And of those who would vote, large numbers would go to vote
with very little prior information.
Just two weeks before
. Or maybe
they had a political agenda for opposing reform and
just wanted to hide behind their misrepresentations of STV.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.329 / Virus Database: 270.12.30/2115 - Release Date: 05/14/09
17:54:00
of the voting system is to ensure that
the various elected assemblies are properly
representative of those who voted. On that, FPTP signally fails to deliver.
And of course, in partisan elections, FPTP also makes
the elected members much more accountable to their parties than to the local
voters.
James
accountable to their parties than to the local
voters.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.325 / Virus Database: 270.12.22/2105 - Release Date: 05/08/09
11:43:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em
are not. Lumping all the
multi-member voting system together as though there
were all just different flavours of ice-cream is a flawed approach and it is
unhelpful in the debate about how best to go forward in
different political cultures.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message
Juho Laatu Sent: Saturday, May 02, 2009 11:33 PM
In Ireland, the constitution requires at least 3 per constituency and
over time the average number of seats per constituency is being
reduced. It is currently illegal (by statutory law) for
constituencies to have more than 5 seats.
against the
election of their first choice. And of course, STV
ensures that that cannot happen.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.5.287 / Virus Database: 270.12.12/2090 - Release Date: 05/01/09
06:17:00
Election-Methods mailing
under full scrutiny. Only then were the
completed numerical files passed to the relevant counting program.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.238 / Virus Database: 270.11.18/2008 - Release Date: 03/17/09
16:25:00
Election
paper or an image of a ballot
paper. You need a Court Order for authority to look at
both the face and reverse of the ballot papers, and that will be granted only
in cases where there is good evidence for fraud to be
suspected.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG
Raph Frank Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 5:54 PM
2009/3/18 James Gilmour jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk:
I'm afraid you have misunderstood (or maybe I didn't explain it
clearly). It is not a software issue - it is a compliance issue. No
matter what software you use to read the images
it affects them
personally and very directly.
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.237 / Virus Database: 270.11.8/1984 - Release Date: 03/04/09
19:17:00
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
will obtain one seat, or more in due
proportion to their votes.
James
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 11:24 AM, James Gilmour
jgilm...@globalnet.co.uk wrote:
Kathy Dopp Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 6:03 PM
Are you opposed to any kind of PR system?
Only if you believe that all PR
Kathy Dopp Sent: Sunday, February 01, 2009 7:33 PM
Obviously I did not express myself clearly enough for you.
When a minority group lives concentrated in particular
geographic districts then single-member districts give them
good representation.
In fact, the BEST method of ensuring fair
On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 1:43 PM, James Gilmour wrote:
In fact, the BEST method of ensuring fair representation for ALL
minorities, including those concentrated in particular localities, is
to elect all the members at large. If the voting support for any
particular minority is large
, London,
England.]
James Gilmour
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.14/1920 - Release Date: 27/01/2009
18:15
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
I had written:
I do not even think about putting all the
remaining options into any
order of preference, much less attempt it.
Juho Laatu Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2009 7:24 PM
Same with me. It is however probably not
a big problem for you to pick some other
product if your favourite
1 - 100 of 193 matches
Mail list logo