[maemo-community] Election process referendum
From: Dave Neary dneary at maemo.orgDate: Mon Feb 2 17:23:23 EET 2009
- Previous message: Election process referendum
- Next message: Election process referendum
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi, Benson Mitchell wrote: >> 1) No change; the current process ("first-five-past-the-post") is fine. >> 2) A single-transferrable vote system. (Wording TBD) >> 3) A reweighted range voting system. (Wording TBD) >> 4) Giving the outgoing council the decision before each election. (Wording >> TBD). >> 5) None of the above. >> > > I like those choices, but this brings us back to something someone pointed > out earlier, the difficulty of getting a clear winner in that sort of > referendum. We don't actually have specific scoring provisions for > referenda, so we could just go with plurality (rather than majority) here, > but that actually opens up some questions. Suppose that it splits 30, 25, > 10, 20, and 5; we'd keep the current system, even though most of the RRV > voters would probably prefer STV or council's choice, and either of those > could have won head-to-head. Now I'm _not_ suggesting we have a referendum > on the voting method to be used in referenda on voting methods, but the > characteristics of the voting method to be used must be considered. <humour> How about people who favour the status quo mark an X, people who want preferential voting vote 1 for council decides, 2 for STV, and 3 for RRV, and people who want RRV vote 100 for RRV, 75 for council decides, 30 for STV and 0 for straight vote? </humour> Cheers, Dave. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: dneary at maemo.org Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org
- Previous message: Election process referendum
- Next message: Election process referendum
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]