Ranked Choice Including Pairwise Elimination: Difference between revisions
Ranked Choice Including Pairwise Elimination (view source)
Revision as of 00:23, 30 March 2022
, 2 years ago→RCIPE STV: Refine grammar in one sentence
(→Description: Clarification about runner-up versus RCIPE STV filling multiple seats) |
m (→RCIPE STV: Refine grammar in one sentence) |
||
Line 151:
* Selecting which ballots get full influence and which ballots get zero influence should make use of information about how many ballots share the same marking pattern. For example, if 100 ballots have the same marking pattern and the decimal calculation method would reduce their influence to 0.8 of a vote each, then selecting any 80 of these ballots to get full influence and giving the remaining 20 ballots zero influence produces the same result as the decimal approach.
* Ballots that have unique or uncommon marking patterns must be selected semi-randomly, yet the total number of supporting ballots getting zero influence must equal the quota count, and the total number of ballots getting full influence must equal the elected-candidate's transfer count minus the quota count.
* Instead of using the same semi-random selections from one counting round to the next, the semi-random selection process should be done for each counting round. This approach makes it unlikely that
* Ballots on which two or more remaining candidates share the same highest ranking level are distributed almost the same as in the decimal calculation method. The significant difference is that ballots with zero influence (during that counting round) are not distributed among the shared-level candidates.
| |||