4,193
edits
Droop quota: Difference between revisions
A bit of cleanup
(Cleaned up article a little bit. The current summary out of w:Droop quota should probably be copied into this article, and then the prose shuffled a bit) |
(A bit of cleanup) |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 26:
In the single-winner case, a Droop quota is a majority. In general, Droop quota-based methods tend to leave at least just under a Droop quota unrepresented. See the [[utility]] article, as the debate between Hare and Droop quotas somewhat parallels and generalizes the [[utilitarianism]] vs. [[majority rule]] debate.
== Hagenbach-Bischoff quota ==
The "Hagenbach-Bischoff quota" ("HB quota") (known by a few other names as well) is:
<math>\left( \frac{\text{total valid poll}}{ \text{seats}+1 } \right)</math>
Some sources call the HB Quota a Droop Quota instead, since the formula is almost identical, and is sometimes considered just another formula in the list of formulas that can used to calculate the Droop Quota. There will always be exactly one more HB quota than seats to be filled. Because of this, it will on rare occasion be necessary to break a tie between various candidates to decide who should win with PR methods that use the HB quota.
When there are 5 seats to be filled and 100 votes cast, the HB quota is (100/(5+1)) = '''~16.667''' votes.
In the single-winner case, an HB quota is half of the voters. In this case, two candidates could each have half of the votes, i.e. two candidates each have one quota, but only one seat can be allotted. Because of this, many PR methods that use HB quotas specify that a candidate must have '' more'' votes than k HB quotas to get k seats (i.e. over half of the votes, in the single-winner case).
[[Category:Quotas]]
| |||