From: | MJ Ray <mjr(at)phonecoop(dot)coop> |
---|---|
To: | spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Election results |
Date: | 2007-08-07 17:09:50 |
Message-ID: | 46b8a75e.444rw3I8uWOPAQjm%mjr@phonecoop.coop |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox |
Thread: | |
Lists: | spi-announce spi-general |
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <antti-juhani(at)kaijanaho(dot)fi> wrote:
> [...] Of course, I can't find
> anywhere a precise definition of the SPI method for *multi-winner*
> elections, but the result page makes me believe it's what I'd expect.
>
> I'll revisit if you'll point me to the definition of the multi-winner
> SPI method :)
The one I found at https://members.spi-inc.org/vote/election.php?id=6
says:
Votes will be counted using the "Condorcet" election method system
which will be used to select the most preferred candidate.
Conceptually, the election will be broken into a a series of
pairwise races between each possible paring of the candidates. If
one candidate beats each of the others in pairwise races, that
candidate wins. Otherwise, the "Cloneproof/Schwartz Sequential
Dropping" method is employed to choose the most prefered candidate
from those remaining. Some background reading on preferential
voting and Condorcet is available online.
As such, you are being asked to vote your preferences by ranking
the candidates. Your preference will best be shown when you
specify all canadiates, in order of preference (i.e. "XYZWTUV", X
being the most preferred). Voting "XY" states that you prefer
candidate X to Y. However, it does not express any preference
relationships for any of the other candidates.
Is that the same one discussed in
http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/06/msg00261.html
? (= is Jacobo Tarrio describing C/SSD? I think)
So, this is non-proportional?
[...]
> My current favourite is the Schulze STV method that generalizes the
> classic Schulze ("cloneproof Schwarz sequential dropping") method to
> multiple-winner elections. It is claimed to satisfy proportionality,
> though I haven't bothered checking the argument myself.
Noted. Will any voting expert tell us how Schulze STV would result?
Thanks,
--
MJ Ray - see/vidu http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html
Experienced webmaster-developers for hire http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
Also: statistician, sysadmin, online shop builder, workers co-op.
Writing on koha, debian, sat TV, Kewstoke http://mjr.towers.org.uk/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho | 2007-08-07 17:30:13 | Re: Election results |
Previous Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2007-08-07 16:37:05 | Re: Election results |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho | 2007-08-07 17:30:13 | Re: Election results |
Previous Message | MJ Ray | 2007-08-07 17:01:54 | Making the ballots secret |