Talk:Single transferable vote: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→STV and clone independence: new section) |
mNo edit summary |
||
Line 1:
== STV and clone independence ==
Woodall proposed one particular multiwinner extension of clone independence in paper 5 of issue 3 of Voting Matters,<ref>http://www.votingmatters.org.uk/ISSUE3/P5.HTM</ref> because it's ambiguous how to generalize clone independence in a way that proportional systems pass. Still, STV does not pass all of Woodall's generalized clone criteria, so I'll remove the claim that STV does pass clone independence.
Related: attempts to find other generalizations of clone independence, or claims that Woodall's clone criteria still won't do the job. <ref>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com//2018-December/001930.html</ref> <ref>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Comparison_of_electoral_systems#Incompatibility_between_clone_independence_and_proportionality</ref> [[User:Kristomun|Kristomun]] ([[User talk:Kristomun|talk]]) 09:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
| |||
Revision as of 09:38, 9 May 2020
STV and clone independence
Woodall proposed one particular multiwinner extension of clone independence in paper 5 of issue 3 of Voting Matters,[1] because it's ambiguous how to generalize clone independence in a way that proportional systems pass. Still, STV does not pass all of Woodall's generalized clone criteria, so I'll remove the claim that STV does pass clone independence.
Related: attempts to find other generalizations of clone independence, or claims that Woodall's clone criteria still won't do the job. [2] [3] Kristomun (talk) 09:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)