[maemo-community] STV voting strategy
From: Dave Neary dneary at maemo.orgDate: Fri Mar 20 12:00:58 EET 2009
- Previous message: STV voting strategy
- Next message: STV voting strategy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi, Frantisek Dufka wrote: > The biggest difference between ranking and STV is that with STV you > really have only _single_ vote (the S in STV) and only your first choice > counts if your candidate is not eliminated further in the process. Not quite accurate - there is also the T (transferable) in STV, which applies to surplus votes. We can see this effect in rounds 2 and 3, the transfers from GA and Jaffa elected Tim Samoff, for example. Jaffa's surplus of 21 transferred: Tim +8, Andrea +1, anidel +1, Jamie +2, Kees +3, sjgadsby +3, qole +3 GA's surplus of 14 transferred: Andrea +1, Jamie +2, anidel +1, Kees +3, sjgadsby +3, qole +3 (Tim was elected at that stage) So over 40% of the votes for Jaffa, and a third of the votes for GA got transferred, in proportion to the number of #2 votes for each of those candidates. Since Tim, Kees, sjgadsby and qole were the most popular transferees from the surplus, this allowed then to build a cushion in later counts and they were protected from elimination in later rounds. One can imagine a situation where one incredibly polarising candidate gets a lot of first preferences (say 20) but does not receive any of those transfers from surpluses or eliminations - he won't get elected. So I disagree - strategically voting for another candidate than your favourite as #1 is not necessary to make your vote count. Your second preference will get taken into account if your favourite candidate has a surplus, or is eliminated. Cheers, Dave. -- maemo.org docsmaster Email: dneary at maemo.org Jabber: bolsh at jabber.org
- Previous message: STV voting strategy
- Next message: STV voting strategy
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]