Quick Runoff: Difference between revisions
Added "Chain Runoff" terminology, as seen on Kevin's page, https://www.votingmethods.net/lnharm/, and references.
m (capitalization: Independence of clones) |
(Added "Chain Runoff" terminology, as seen on Kevin's page, https://www.votingmethods.net/lnharm/, and references.) |
||
Line 1:
'''Quick Runoff'''
The method is so named because in the three-candidate case it is not as "instant" as [[IRV]], as instead of a single top-two runoff, there is first a simulated runoff between the top two candidates, and then potentially the bottom two candidates.
The method may be badly named because the winner is actually found without doing any vote transfers. The results of the "runoffs" are inferred from the pairwise contests.
The method was first proposed in 2010.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2010-May/091628.html|title=Quick Runoff (QR) LNHarm method and commentary|website=Election-methods mailing list archives|date=2010-05-16|last=Venzke|first=K.}}</ref>
==Definition==
Line 25 ⟶ 27:
Memphis has a majority loss to Nashville, so Memphis will not win. Nashville does not have a majority loss to Knoxville. The method thus ends here, with the election of Nashville.
== References ==
<references />
[[Category:Single-winner voting methods]]
| |||