User:RodCrosby/QPR2: Difference between revisions
→PR Squared examples: summary
m (→PR Squared examples: etc.) |
(→PR Squared examples: summary) |
||
Line 248:
Simulations indicate that whatever method is employed, including Buhagiar's preferred Priority Queue, such anomalies cannot be avoided entirely, and are just subjectively more or less "unfair" to the particular candidates affected. Simulations also suggest that only a handful of allocations would meet such conflicts (usually fewer than 20 in a house of 650, or about 3% of the seats).
An alternative resolution of these approximately 20 seat conflicts would be to follow that method recommended for the Dual Member Proportional System. In this case, simply award the seat to the party with the largest remainder quota, and the party denied the seat would
Whichever method is adopted, simulations show that around 97% of the declarations will be straightforward, employing either FPTP or full quota, or best remainder quotas.
Such rare blemishes could be argued to be far outweighed by the list of overall major improvements offered by PR^2 compared to FPTP.
| |||