User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→PR Squared examples: and first) |
(→Justifications: also) |
||
| Line 247: | Line 247: | ||
===Justifications=== |
===Justifications=== |
||
Note that Buhagiar was considering seat allocations to achieve the closest overall proportional result in Malta. PR squared does not have that constraint and indeed, by the nature of the system, the largest and smallest parties are significantly over and under represented respectively. It seems fairer that most of such anomalies should fall on the largest parties, which already benefit hugely from the system by virtue of their seat bonuses. |
Note that Buhagiar was considering seat allocations to achieve the closest overall proportional result in Malta. PR squared does not have that constraint and indeed, by the nature of the system, the largest and smallest parties are significantly over and under represented respectively. It seems fairer that most of such anomalies should fall on the largest parties, which already benefit hugely from the system by virtue of their seat bonuses. |
||
It could be justified that the only guarantee of a seat is to win a plurality and/or a full quota in a constituency, and candidates affected by the anomaly would be "secondary" candidates by definition, if they were running in a closed list tandem. |
|||
Such anomalies are hardly any more unfair than those which currently pass without comment under FPTP. |
Such anomalies are hardly any more unfair than those which currently pass without comment under FPTP. |
||