+- Forums (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum)
+-- Forum: Second Floor (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=112)
+--- Forum: Board Meeting Room (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=19)
+---- Forum: Past Proposals & Discussions (https://nslazarus.com/old_forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=50)
+---- Thread: [Discussion] Elections Act/Voting System Discussion (/showthread.php?tid=851)
[Discussion] Elections Act/Voting System Discussion - New Rogernomics - 07-08-2019
Elections Act/Voting System Discussion
Leads on from this: https://www.nslazarus.com/thread-825-post-6510.html#pid6510
In the proposed constitutional amendment, instant run-off was put in place, though we have never really had a discussion on a voting system.
So we'd probably want to decide this going forward.
1. Instant Run-Off Voting Methods
There are several different algorithms methods, so we'd have to decide on these first:
Examples: https://courses.lumenlearning.com/waymakermath4libarts/chapter/instant-runoff-voting/
With Instant Run-Off you rank by choice, and gradually eliminate till you get a winner that way.
The rounds of voting can be determined by one general vote, if necessary.
2. Traditional Rounded Voting Method
The voting continues till a winner is found through rounds of voting.
Round 1: So A gets 2 votes, X gets 6 votes, Y gets 4 votes, and Z gets 6 votes.
Round 2: A is eliminated. X gets 7 votes, Y gets 4 votes, Z gets 7 votes
Round 3: Y is eliminated. X gets 10 votes, and Z gets 8 votes.
Therefore, X wins as X has the most votes overall.
3.Rounded Voting via Majority Method
The voting continues till a winner is found through rounds of voting - but there must be a majority.
Round 1: So A gets 2 votes, X gets 6 votes, Y gets 4 votes, and Z gets 6 votes.
Round 2: A is eliminated. X gets 7 votes, Y gets 4 votes, Z gets 7 votes
Round 3: Y is eliminated. X gets 10 votes (or 55%), and Z gets 8 votes (or 44%).
Therefore, X wins on 55%.
^That is a basic summary.
RE: Elections Act/Voting System Discussion - Wymondham - 07-08-2019
I think by Instant runoff voting Cormac and Atlantica mean the way it has been carried out in regions where he has constitutionally proscribed the same method. The way it has traditionally worked in Cormac's constitutions is lots of candidates run. Then if no candidate gets a majority, there is an instant runoff between the top 2 candidates
RE: Elections Act/Voting System Discussion - New Rogernomics - 07-09-2019
wymondham;6514 Wrote:I think by Instant runoff voting Cormac and Atlantica mean the way it has been carried out in regions where he has constitutionally proscribed the same method. The way it has traditionally worked in Cormac's constitutions is lots of candidates run. Then if no candidate gets a majority, there is an instant runoff between the top 2 candidatesIn that case, it still needs a decision on the type/criteria: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting#Voting_method_criteria
Closest to what you are describing seems to be this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-round_system#Compliance_with_voting_system_criteria
RE: Elections Act/Voting System Discussion - Aumelodia - 07-11-2019
NR - The two "systems" you outline in your OP are exactly the same. Whenever there are only two candidates, one will always have a majority, so there is no case where your two procedures are different.
To your point in the other thread, IRV actually isn't very complex at all. Its sister-system, Single Transferable Vote (basically IRV but used for multi-winner elections) is the headache-inducing one, and the one that caused all the problems at the ConCon. When you only have a single winner, then it's called IRV (I think you're referring to it as "rounded voting") and is quite simple.
Wym - That's by definition not IRV, that's a Two-Round System. I imagine what was being referred to is the same as to the system that TSP uses, which is also legislated as IRV. It's exactly what NR detailed in the OP.