VFA Runoff: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
imported>KVenzke (→Example: oops) |
imported>KVenzke |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
In the above scenario [[IRV]] elects Knoxville. An "instant" version of VFA Runoff could be defined like this: |
In the above scenario [[IRV]] elects Knoxville. An "instant" version of VFA Runoff could be defined like this: |
||
The voter ranks the candidates. |
The voter ranks the candidates. For simplicity say that rankings must be complete. While more than one candidate remains, eliminate one: If more than half of the voters rank the same candidate strictly last among all remaining candidates, eliminate this candidate; otherwise eliminate the candidate with the fewest first preferences as under IRV. |
||
In the above scenario, "instant" VFA Runoff would eliminate Memphis as before. At that point more than half of the voters rank Knoxville last, so that Knoxville is eliminated. At that point, this same majority ranks Chattanooga last, so that the winner of the method is Nashville, the [[Condorcet winner]]. |
In the above scenario, "instant" VFA Runoff would eliminate Memphis as before. At that point more than half of the voters rank Knoxville last, so that Knoxville is eliminated. At that point, this same majority ranks Chattanooga last, so that the winner of the method is Nashville, the [[Condorcet winner]]. |
||