matgb: (Webstuff)
Mat Bowles ([personal profile] matgb) wrote2009-05-26 06:55 pm

Europe, books, maps and snails—MOAR linkspam

A nice little mix of stuff in this lot, though the politics averse amongst you should be warned that with elections next week there's a fair bit on that, though not much of it is serious. Posted to both LJ and DW with comments open for technical reasons that I can't be arsed to fix, LJ version: Europe, books, maps and snails—MOAR linkspam
chris: (mobius-scarf)

[personal profile] chris 2009-05-26 06:50 pm (UTC)(link)
This is one of the few electoral systems I've encountered I consider to be worse than the one we use for Westminster

This surprises me.

Having a quick look through your old posts, I see you linked to your post here. I like MM-STV in general, in principle, and I'm not familiar with reasons why it might work especially well for one level of government and not work so well for another. I imagine I would be pursuaded by arguments as to how it is more appropriate for the UK elections to the European Parliament than the system we're using next week.

However, returning to the first para, I don't see why FPTP and the results it generated in the 1994 European Elections would be preferable to the system used in 2004 (and next week).
chris: (bankformonument)

[personal profile] chris 2009-05-26 08:18 pm (UTC)(link)
Fair enough, makes sense. Thank you.

Let me check my understanding. If everyone genuinely votes their first preference then the system works to some extent, but if sufficiently many people deliberately conceal their first preference in an attempt to finesse the distribution of later seats then results become unpredictable. You make it sound like it's a system that works best with either relatively few positions to be divided, so the incentive to vote tactically is weak, or relatively many positions to be divided, so the effects of tactical voting are likely to be much smaller - and some of the larger UK Euro-constituencies have hit an unsweet spot in the middle!

I can see your arguments in favour of open lists and against closed ones.