<div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div>Apologies for previous incomplete message. I hate the keyboard on</div><div> this laptop, which seems to interpret simultaneous depresion of</div><div>some combination of control, shift and function keys on the left</div><div>as "send mail." Grrr.</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 at 23:23, Andrew Harvey <<a href="mailto:andrew.harvey4@gmail.com" target="_blank">andrew.harvey4@gmail.com</a>> wrote:I wrote about changing from a for/against vote to a pick your preferred option at <a href="https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/394419" target="_blank">https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/aharvey/diary/394419</a></div></blockquote><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div> Interested to hear what others think about this.</div></blockquote><div> </div><div>There are inherent problems when using first-past-the-post voting with</div><div>more than two political candidates, and these have been covered</div><div>extensively in the field of political science.<br></div><div><br></div>Assume somebody who favours X over Y adds Z (that is similar</div><div class="gmail_quote">to Y) in an attempt to split the vote for Y. It could turn 4,6 for X,Y</div><div class="gmail_quote">into 4,3,3 for X,Y,Z.</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Assume Y is a compromise between X and Z. Those who want</div><div class="gmail_quote">X could live with Y. Those who want Z could live with Y. The</div><div class="gmail_quote">vote ends up as 4,3,3 for X,Y,Z, so X wins even though only</div><div class="gmail_quote">4 people wanted X and 6 people did not want X and Y would</div><div class="gmail_quote">have been a compromise acceptable to all.<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">There are many other problems, particularly if bad actors</div><div class="gmail_quote">are involved. You can get around some of them with</div><div class="gmail_quote">schemes like single transferable vote, but even those schemes</div><div class="gmail_quote">have problems. The scheme with fewest problems is a<br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Condorcet method. Even that is not without flaws, but</div><div class="gmail_quote">the biggest can be eliminated by saying that if you get a loop</div><div class="gmail_quote"> you have a completely new vote.</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">It's a lot of work to make this fly. Maybe you should put propose</div><div class="gmail_quote">a list of options and we'll vote on it...<br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">-- <br></div><div class="gmail_quote">Paul</div><div class="gmail_quote"><br></div><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
</blockquote></div></div>