Dea All, There is so much disagreement on a subject when not much is known about it; it hasn't advanced much as a science.  Everyone thinks they are an expert, because they vote. I thought so. Most scientific improvements came in the 19th century, from mathematicians developing the Hare system. STV (IMO) the best system perhaps only had one significant improvement in the 20th century (Meek method). An outstanding problem with all the worlds elections is that they don't have rational counts. This is what PR campaigns are essentially all about.. FPTP is not a rational election. But no voting methods have a rational exclusion count, as well as a rational election count. All the worlds voting systems are at best half rational. https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/1111349 Regards, Richard Lung.

On 24.10.2021 11:01, Richard Lung wrote: > > > Dea All,  > > There is so much disagreement on a subject when not much is known about > it; it hasn't advanced much as a science.  Everyone thinks they are an > expert, because they vote. I thought so. Most scientific improvements > came in the 19th century, from mathematicians developing the Hare > system. STV (IMO) the best system perhaps only had one significant > improvement in the 20th century (Meek method). > An outstanding problem with all the worlds elections is that they don't > have rational counts. This is what PR campaigns are essentially all > about.. FPTP is not a rational election. But no voting methods have a > rational exclusion count, as well as a rational election count. All the > worlds voting systems are at best half rational. > > https://www.smashwords.com/books/view/1111349 As I tend to say, I would really like to have a computer implementation of this method (in some form or other) so that I could verify the claims myself :-) -km