It would have been good to have an explanation of the AV acronym.
For those living on this side of the pond here is a link that I found helpful:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/apr/07/av-referendum-alternative-vote
Cheers, Nigel
Nigel Waters, PhD
Professor, Director
Geographic Information Science, Center of Excellence
Dept. of Geography and Geoinformation Science
George Mason University, Rm 254B, Research 1 Building
4400 University Drive MS 6C3
Fairfax, Virginia, USA 22030-4422
Phone: 703-993-4687 e-Mail: [log in to unmask]
Professor Emeritus of Geography, University of Calgary
Editor Cartographica
Member of the Editorial Board of Applied Spatial Analysis and Policy
2010 Henrietta Harvey Distinguished Lecturer, Memorial University, Newfoundland
----- Original Message -----
From: Tony Greenfield <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sunday, April 10, 2011 11:16 am
Subject: To AV or not to AV?
> To AV or not to AV?
>
>
>
> I really cannot decide which way to vote in the referendum. We
> are asked to choose between two unsatisfactory methods. The only
> arguments I have seen, for both sides, are assertions, often over
> long lists of signatories, with very few references to places
> where the methods are used.
>
> Simulation seems, to me, to be the only way to compare methods. I
> tried this, basing my prior distributions on the 2010
> parliamentary results, This showed a great bias to the liberal
> democrats. However, I accept that my simulation procedure and my
> assumptions are too weak even to discuss.
>
> A problem with old age is that I lack resources and energy to
> pursue the project. I should like to see a well-constructed
> simulation study of parliamentary elections comparing all
> possible candidate voting systems. As well as AV and FPTP, these
> should include the alternative member system (AMS), AV plus,
> mixed member proportional (MMP), mixed member system (MMS), a
> regional list, a second ballot (SB), a single transferable vote
> (STV), a supplementary vote (SV) and some hybrids of these.
>
> Or perhaps, from the study, we could invent a method that is
> better than any of these? Better in what way? A fairer
> representation and a stronger government? These two aims are
> perhaps incompatible.
>
> But does it matter in the long run? Most despots must believe
> that democracy is the counting of heads regardless of what’s in them.
>
>
>
> Tony Greenfield
> Middle Cottage
> Little Hucklow
> Derbyshire SK17 8RT
> 01298 872326
>
> [log in to unmask]
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Greenfield
>
> ******************************************************
> Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
> message will go only to the sender of this message.
> If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
> 'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
> to [log in to unmask]
> Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the
> sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of
> views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find
> out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and
> read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to
> visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
> *******************************************************
******************************************************
Please note that if you press the 'Reply' button your
message will go only to the sender of this message.
If you want to reply to the whole list, use your mailer's
'Reply-to-All' button to send your message automatically
to [log in to unmask]
Disclaimer: The messages sent to this list are the views of the sender and cannot be assumed to be representative of the range of views held by subscribers to the Radical Statistics Group. To find out more about Radical Statistics and its aims and activities and read current and past issues of our newsletter you are invited to visit our web site www.radstats.org.uk.
*******************************************************
|