 |
 |
My understanding is as you have described, Ted (except that only 1st-preferences and "upgraded 1st preferences" are counted I think.) JOHN BIBBY On 28 September 2010 17:02, Ted Harding <[log in to unmask]>wrote: > My thanks to Will, and to Alison MacFarlane (off-list) for pointers > to the detailed results. Will states: > > "The bottom candidate is eliminated and their votes redistributed > to their next preference if they put one." > > Just to make sure I understand this correctly, does it mean: > > If voter X votes for A as first preference, with B as second > preference, and A is eliminated, the X's vote for B becomes > a first-preference vote for B in the next round. X's votes > for C (3rd preference), D (4th preference), ... become X's > 2nd-preference vote for C, 3rd-preference vote for D, ... > > ?? > > With thanks, > Ted. > > On 27-Sep-10 22:08:45, Will Parbury wrote: > > The result of the Labour leadership election are here > > http://www2.labour.org.uk/results > > > > There were 3 sections the affiliated societies and unions are combined > > and people could vote for as many or as few of the candidates as they > > wanted > > > > The bottom candidate is elimated and their votes redistributed to their > > next > > preference if they put one. > > > > Will Parbury > > > > > > > >> Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 22:57:44 +0100 > >> From: [log in to unmask] > >> Subject: Labour Leadership Election > >> To: [log in to unmask] > >> > >> Greetings all! > >> The details of how Ed Milliband bubbled to the top over > >> the 4 rounds of the Leadership Election have been widely > >> summarised -- e.g. > >> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-1141254 > >> > >> However, I have not seen the full details. It seems there > >> were 4 "constituencies": > >> -- MPs and MEPs > >> -- Party Members > >> -- Unions > >> -- Affiliated Societies > >> > >> And there were 5 candidates. I don't know the details of > >> the voting system -- e.g. were voters required to list > >> all 5 in order of preference, or up to 5, or some fixed > >> number less than 5, or ... ? > >> > >> Nor do I know the rules for allocating the redistribution > >> of votes as candidates got eliminated round-by-round. > >> > >> However, someone must know these things. One of you? > >> Got a URL? > >> > >> I'm intrigued by the sequence of events, and would like > >> to trace through what happened to the votes. To do this > >> in detail would need knowledge of the numerical distribution > >> of the votes at first instance. > >> > >> In the most detailed possible case, this means, for each of > >> the 120 possible orderings of the 5 candidates, how many > >> votes in each "constituency" were made for each ordering > >> (of course it is very likely that not all orderings would > >> be represented). I should imagine that knowledge of the > >> voting by each voter would be confidential, but the voting > >> by "constituency" (per possible ordering) may not be. > >> > >> Does anyone have a pointer to this information? Given the > >> percentages quoted (e.g.) in the above BBC URL, it might > >> be possible to reconstruct it if one knew the numbers of > >> ballot papers in the different "constituencies". > >> > >> If I can get this information, I will later post the results > >> of my tracking! > >> > >> With thanks, > >> Ted. > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]> > >> Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 > >> Date: 27-Sep-10 Time: 22:57:41 > >> ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ > >> > >> ****************************************************** > >> 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. > > ******************************************************* > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > E-Mail: (Ted Harding) <[log in to unmask]> > Fax-to-email: +44 (0)870 094 0861 > Date: 28-Sep-10 Time: 17:02:08 > ------------------------------ XFMail ------------------------------ > > ****************************************************** > 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. *******************************************************