stv-voting at Yahoo! Groups

STV and Freedom of Information in the UK

mawpa2002 — Mon, 14 Sep 2009 18:41:56 GMT

I strongly support STV but I also strongly support transparency in the process of elections. I believe the two are compatible but it does concern me that a

Announcing OpenSTV 1.5

Jeffrey O'Neill — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:39:56 GMT

Announcing OpenSTV version 1.5 -- Software for computing the single transferable vote, instant runoff voting, Condorcet, approval, and many other voting

Re: Pressure on Jenkins commission.

Richard Lung — Mon, 17 Aug 2009 17:54:28 GMT

James, I see now that arguing the commission's dependence wouldnt serve. They were influenced but they chose to heed the powers that be. Whether they chose ill

Re: Pressure on Jenkins commission.

James Gilmour — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:18:25 GMT

Richard Politics is a hard and dirty world. But that's the world where electoral reform has to be achieved. Except in a country with binding citizens'

Pressure on Jenkins commission.

Richard Lung — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 18:37:39 GMT

James, If true, this information would be more than a cause for cynicism. It would be a breach of the terms of the so-called Independent Commission. It is in

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

Jim Riley — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 11:03:53 GMT

I did a more careful analysis, using the actual vote totals in each district. While doing so, I discovered that 2 FPTP districts had been added subsequent to

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

James Gilmour — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 21:32:43 GMT

Jim Riley > Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 5:32 AM ... Your analysis is interesting. I'll file the numbers for reference. ... Yes, of course - that is always

Re: Where from the 2nd BC referendum?

James Gilmour — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 20:44:20 GMT

Richard Lung > Sent: Sunday, August 09, 2009 7:02 PM Just comments on two of Richard's points. ... ... It has to be remembered that Jenkins' AV+, while

Where from the 2nd BC referendum?

Richard Lung — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 18:23:21 GMT

Re the mention of myself in this post, it would be truer to say that I am trying to point out the logic of choice and its proper application by STV for

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

Jim Riley — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 04:52:25 GMT

In many cases where there are multi-member districts elected by FPTP, each voter may cast N votes. This is true even when there is a majority requirement,

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

Jim Riley — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 04:32:03 GMT

In the proposed STV districts in BC, the dominant party (in the STV district) won 66 of 83 seats. In only two of the 20 STV districts was the distribution of

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

Dave Robinson — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 20:34:03 GMT

Dear stv-voters, The main criticism of the "bottom up" or multi-winner IRV method rests upon extreme cases where a very popular candidate gets multiple

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

James Gilmour — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:36:35 GMT

Antony Hodgson > Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 11:14 PM ... I don't think this at all a subtle point. It is a very obvious point that can be made very

Re: [Fwd: Re: [stv-voting] Interdistrict instant runoffs]

Colin Rosenstiel — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 23:01:36 GMT

I don't really get this. Transfers aren't so hard to explain. If a candidate has more than they need you transfer the surplus, if they can't get anywhere they

Re: Interdistrict instant runoffs

Antony Hodgson — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 22:15:18 GMT

I agree with what you say, but this is a subtle point that takes quite a while for the average voter to understand. Even in your example, it might be the case