what's the word for when you elect multiple peeps (and thus can't elect a peep twice) vs when you're electing a party (and thus can have multiple winners)
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
or when it's more like a parliamentary system where there's 100 seats and so party A gets 20 reps, B 30, C 5 and D 45?
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@risottobias the latter is the D'Hondt method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%27Hondt_method
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann more like "You're voting for Jane, Peter and David, even though David got elected on the first round you can't elect David twice"
Vs "You're voting for green, blue, and yellow. Green got 75% so it gets at least two seats"
What's the word for the ones where you peel off a candidate once they have a seat, vs the ones where you keep the party in?
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann I saw that earlier, I like it
-
@deilann I'm demoing different voting styles.
Users can vote:
Single choice fptp
Approval
Ranked
RatedAnd then the results are calculated for each for single winner, multiple rep, and parliamentary?
Like multi rep approval, vs multi rep STV, vs
So I'm trying to make sure I get the right algorithm for each type
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann clarification, I don't mean the counting is mixed method (e.g. some do FPTP on the first round then STV, or do local candidate then party list)
I just mean I'm computing a matrix of results based on a list of inputs
selections_methods x winner_style {set of preferred counting algorithms per each}
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann I mean, sorta? I wasn't really categorizing these into party candidates on purpose,
but people could be like "software project A wants to do proposals 1 or 2" and then you get into open list vs closed list or cumulative)
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
parallel voting! you can vote for 1 or 2 without ranking
-
@deilann they're voting for these gorgeous beasties for @bivouacwiki, drawn by @ L @ mastoart.social
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann that's two voting systems in parallel
each of the result outcomes is a demo, I don't want to combine the rows
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
hmmm
the david can't win twice scenario sounds like a multi-round plurality situation where you have an instant-runoff with david removed but not as a loser
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann hmmm, is IRV the one for FPTP but multi?
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
@risottobias IRV is one of those concepts that just depends on how it's being implemented
it can be in FPTP when there's no plurality, removing some candidates or for a secondary seat
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann hmmm, what would you pick for the 12 cells?
balancing ease of calculation vs other factors
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by [email protected]
not fully sure i get what you're asking but in this "multiple instant runoff" situation i'd only recalculate "david's" (obviously necessary, he's no longer running) votes and the votes of those who voted for "weaker" candidates to simulate voter-correction (feeling like their preferred candidate won't win the second vote)
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann hmmm
maybe there aren't good algorithms for different cells...
like I know STAR gets used for single winner stuff?
-
deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified:replied to Risotto last edited by
i think the problem is that the second round alters preferences. so it's not just that we've lost a candidate but that the outcome changes how people vote.
-
Risottoreplied to deilann v -0.2 :neodog_hyper: :neodog_nom_verified: last edited by
@deilann well, some systems also make distinctions between voters "already being represented" by the first rep, vs carrying a harmonic series (or other fractional) amount of oomf to elect the next reps