From: | Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | henrik(dot)ingo(at)avoinelama(dot)fi |
Cc: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Voting system R&D (Re: 2017 update to the SPI voting algorithm for Board elections) |
Date: | 2017-03-04 15:47:26 |
Message-ID: | 22714.57742.739685.764052@chiark.greenend.org.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-general |
Henrik Ingo writes ("Re: Voting system R&D (Re: 2017 update to the SPI voting algorithm for Board elections)"):
> Purely as a FYI on Schulze method, it is implemented in the Liquid
> Feedback system: http://liquidfeedback.org/
Thanks. That's interesting. I wasn't aware of that. I think Liquid
Feedback is very exciting. It is an innovative system used by
politically oriented organisations who understand governance problems
well.
But I think in SPI we probably want to be more conservative.
In particular, Scottish STV (a traditional STV variant) has some
important advantages for us over Schultze STV:
* The specification of Scottish STV is expressed in readily
comprehensible prose, as opposed to mathematics.
* We already have multiple independent implementations of Scottish
STV. (Note that Markus has not provided the actual source code of
his implementation AFAIC T1])
* Scottish STV is considerably simpler. My reimplementation in Perl
is 432 lines. Markus's implementation of Schultze STV in C++ is
6000-7000 lines, depending on which variant we use.
* Traditional STV (including Scottish STV specifically) has a large
body of independent analysis - not just of the voting system from a
mathematical/technical level, but also of the sociopolitical
effects such as effects on voting patterns and on attitudes in the
polity.
My personal view is that a more Condorcet-ish proportional voting
system is a good thing, but that I would like to see more third-party
analysis. I do have the skills to follow Martin's paper myself, but
digging into this in detail is not a personal priority for me right
now.
In any case, the differences in outcome between Schultze STV and
Scottish STV are likely to be minor.
Thanks,
Ian.
[1] There is the file http://m-schulze.9mail.de/schulze3.zip whilch
contains (at least) four different variants, which have obviously been
generated from a single original source file. Neither that original
source file nor the machinery for substuting the variants is in the
zipfile.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Dimitri John Ledkov | 2017-03-04 18:00:35 | Re: Voting system R&D (Re: 2017 update to the SPI voting algorithm for Board elections) |
Previous Message | Ian Jackson | 2017-03-04 14:54:52 | Re: Voting system R&D (Re: 2017 update to the SPI voting algorithm for Board elections) |