Re: Multi-winner Condorcet, vs STV

From: Adrian Bunk <bunk(at)stusta(dot)de>
To: "Barak A(dot) Pearlmutter" <barak(at)cs(dot)nuim(dot)ie>
Cc: spi-general(at)lists(dot)spi-inc(dot)org, Ian Jackson <ijackson(at)chiark(dot)greenend(dot)org(dot)uk>
Subject: Re: Multi-winner Condorcet, vs STV
Date: 2009-12-10 21:59:37
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox
Lists: spi-general

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 09:15:11PM +0000, Barak A. Pearlmutter wrote:
> Ian is correct: using the top K Condorcet winners is a very poor
> multiwinner election system, if the goal is to have proportional
> representation.
> Having studied this a bit, I would suggest that the best currently
> available multiwinner election system for our purposes here, i.e., for
> proportional representation, is Reweighted Range Voting, see
> for details. Advantages: with RRV it is really simple to cast a valid
> ballot, ballots can be quite expressive, it is easy to explain how to
> vote, and it is quite simple to calculate the winners. The main
> disadvantage (cannot do per-district tallying) is not a problem for us.

You claim "easy to explain how to vote".


How do I choose the numbers for giving my vote the maximum desired

> --Barak.



"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed

Browse spi-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Ian Jackson 2009-12-11 15:07:51 Re: Multi-winner Condorcet, vs STV
Previous Message Barak A. Pearlmutter 2009-12-10 21:15:11 Re: Multi-winner Condorcet, vs STV