PLACE FAQ: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
imported>Homunq |
imported>Homunq |
||
| Line 282: | Line 282: | ||
* PLACE has just one kind of representative, and all of them are equally accountable to voters. |
* PLACE has just one kind of representative, and all of them are equally accountable to voters. |
||
* PLACE doesn't waste the votes of those supporting parties which don't meet the minimum party threshold. |
|||
* PLACE doesn't require redrawing districts or increasing the size of the legislature. |
* PLACE doesn't require redrawing districts or increasing the size of the legislature. |
||
| Line 288: | Line 290: | ||
=== How does PLACE compare to other newly-proposed proportional methods? === |
=== How does PLACE compare to other newly-proposed proportional methods? === |
||
The theory and practice of designing voting methods has advanced substantially in the last 20 years, and PLACE is just one result of that. I've seen various other proposals which I consider to be superior to STV, OLPR, and MMP, such as [http://www.fairvote.ca/ruralurbanproportional/ Rural Urban Proportional]. I can imagine that it might be possible to design something better than PLACE, or something that's just as good but for whatever reason can get more support. |
|||
It's impossible to discuss the relative advantages and disadvantages of all possible methods here. Discussing various methods is beneficial insofar as it makes it more likely that one of them will pass, but becomes harmful if it devolves into warring camps each highlighting the disadvantages of opposing methods. |
|||
== Political strategy == |
== Political strategy == |
||