Hi Dimitri,
On 2017-03-03 11:26, Dimitri John Ledkov wrote:
On 2 March 2017 at 18:07, Barak A. Pearlmutter <ba...@pearlmutter.net> wrote:
On 1 March 2017 at 13:47, Filipus Klutiero <chea...@gmail.com> wrote:
I have received tens of mails from FVC and none discussed monotonicity or
any technical point.
This was not a comment on the substance of Barak's claim.
In my discussion of these issues, I did my best to give pointers to
grounded technical information that shows that STV and even its
underlying IRV are poor voting systems, which actually exhibit major
pathologies in practice. (E.g., electing the least-preferred of the
top three mayoral candidates in Burlington Vermont; messing up when
presented with actual Debian Project Leader ballots; leading to
long-term two-party domination in the legislature using STV in
Australia.)
[...]
STV is a voting system that strives to achieve proportional
representation, and that's a property which is desired for the SPI
board as it is a long-standing observation that the board is
disproportionally Debian member heavy.
I would disagree with that. I would rather say that STV tries to improve the
representativeness of representative bodies while maintaining a traditional / very simple
system (although, its winner determination rules are arguably no longer "very
simple").
[...]
--
Filipus Klutiero
http://www.philippecloutier.com
_______________________________________________
Spi-general mailing list
Spi-general@lists.spi-inc.org
http://lists.spi-inc.org/listinfo/spi-general
