Pairwise counting: Difference between revisions
→Dealing with write-in candidates
Line 207:
== Dealing with write-in candidates ==
A comprehensive approach is to, in each [[precinct]], count the number of ballots that explicitly rank each (non-write-in) candidate. When a write-in candidate is found on a ballot, then before that ballot is counted, the number of votes each non-write-in candidate gets against the write-in candidate is the number of ballots they were so far ranked on. The ballot is then counted, and the write-in candidate is treated as a non-write-in candidate from that point onwards (from the perspective of this algorithm). When the pairwise vote totals are summed up from each precinct, then if in one precinct a write-in candidate wasn't marked by any voters but in another they were, then similarly the number of votes each candidate in the first precinct is treated as getting against the write-in candidate are the number of ballots that ranked them in the first precinct. <ref>{{Cite web|url=https://electowiki.org/wiki/Talk:Condorcet_method|title=Condorcet method|date=2020-05-14|website=Electowiki|language=en|access-date=2020-05-14}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/fsa4np/possible_solution_to_the_condorcet_writein_problem/fm7bgpd|title=r/EndFPTP - Comment by u/ASetOfCondors on ”Possible solution to the Condorcet write-in problem”|website=reddit|language=en-US|access-date=2020-05-14}}</ref>
The below-discussed negative counting approach automatically handles write-ins, and requires less markings than the above-mentioned approach.
| |||