Re: Election results

From: Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>
To: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org
Subject: Re: Election results
Date: 2007-08-07 17:57:50
Message-ID: 20070807175750.GA30493@phlogiston.dyndns.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Thread:
Lists: spi-announce spi-general

On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 02:51:24PM +0100, MJ Ray wrote:
> Anyway, should/how could we try to fix this proportionality failure?

I don't believe Condorcet of any stripe is intended to fix the
proportionality you seem to be interested in. My dim recollection of
Condorcet, from the days when I studied voting systems > 10 years ago,
was that it was intended to solve the problem where some (largish)
percentage of voters have _none_ of their preferences reflected. The
idea here is that voters are more willing to accept their second-best
(or third- or whatever-best) choice in preference to the thing they
regard as worst. This tends to mean that polarising choices are
always excluded, and that exclusion is regarded as a feature and not
a bug.

A

--
Andrew Sullivan | ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
Everything that happens in the world happens at some place.
--Jane Jacobs

Responses

Browse spi-announce by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2007-08-07 18:02:35 Re: Election results
Previous Message Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho 2007-08-07 17:30:13 Re: Election results

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andrew Sullivan 2007-08-07 18:02:35 Re: Election results
Previous Message Jimmy Kaplowitz 2007-08-07 17:32:54 Re: Making the ballots secret