User:BetterVotingAdvocacy/Big page of ideas: Difference between revisions
User:BetterVotingAdvocacy/Big page of ideas (view source)
Revision as of 09:13, 7 April 2020
, 4 years agono edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 76:
B is the CW, so they'd win the first seat. If their supporters' ballots are reweighted by half, then C pairwise beats A 48.5 to 34 and wins, despite A being bullet voted by a Droop quota. One complicated way of possibly fixing this is to, after electing B, say that if B hadn't been in the election, C would have been the winner, and therefore both B and C voters' ballots should be reweighted by half since they both rank C above all candidates other than B (A), thus allowing A to beat C 34 to 33.
It is likely possible that the [[tied at the top rule]] can be made to work with something like Smith//Approval. Example:
4 A>B| >C
3 C| >A>B
4 C| >B>A
There is an A>B>C>A cycle, with C winning with 7 approvals. If 2 of the A-top voters swap A and B, then B becomes the CW. To avoid needing this, if these voters instead vote A=B, then they can create a pairwise tie between A and B according to the tied at the top rule. However, this still means C beats A and A ties B, so all 3 candidates are in the Smith set. To circumvent this, perhaps it's possible to ignore C's defeat against A because A is in a "special tie" with B, who beats C, which then makes A and B the only candidates in the Smith set.
| |||