Re: [ga] [resend] STV voting method

["Michael Froomkin - U.Miami School of Law" <froomkin@law.miami.edu>]

On Thu, 23 Sep 1999, Elisabeth Porteneuve wrote:

> Michael,
> 
> I was explained that when external considerations like geographical
> diversity (which is essential in ICANN process) are added to the
> STV algorithm itself, the method became distorted.

Distortions are possible with EVERY type of electoral system.  The issue
is which sort are most likely, and which are most feared.

Thus without a comparative element, the above statement is true, but very
incomplete.

> 
> Another point is, that every mathematical method had border
> considerations.

Yes, including first past the post.

> I believe the electorate size shall have some minimum to be
> considered for STV, otherwise it is meaningless.

This is completely contrary to what I have read (and written).  Do you
have a source for this?


> There should be at least two parameters to be taken into
> account simultaneously:
>         some ratio between Number-of-people-to-be-elected
>         to Electorate-size *and* Electorate-size
> to have some mathematical significancy.
> 


Yes. STV meets these criteria.

> Last not the least, the understanding of voting procedure
> by everybody is essential -- and this is not a case for STV.
> 

If the NC cannot understand the voting system, they are in the wrong job.
We are not talking about a masssive group here.  It can be explained in
five to ten minutes.

> Elisabeth
> 

-- 
A. Michael Froomkin   |    Professor of Law    |   froomkin@law.tm
U. Miami School of Law, P.O. Box 248087, Coral Gables, FL 33124 USA
+1 (305) 284-4285  |  +1 (305) 284-6506 (fax)  |  http://www.law.tm
                 -->   It's warm and damp here.   <--