election-methods@mailman.electorama.com

Technical discussion of election methods

View all threads

Re: [EM] A stronger proportionality criterion than Droop and a weaker no harm criterion than LNH

R
rahyman@sbcglobal.net
Sat, Oct 6, 2018 5:48 PM

Oops.  The second variant does not require truncated ballots but I forgot to
remove that from the definitions of V_A and S_A for the second variant.
They should read

V_A equals the sum of ballots with candidate A the highest ranked hopeful
candidate.

S_A equals the sum of seat values of all  ballots with candidate A the
highest ranked hopeful candidate.

Oops. The second variant does not require truncated ballots but I forgot to remove that from the definitions of V_A and S_A for the second variant. They should read V_A equals the sum of ballots with candidate A the highest ranked hopeful candidate. S_A equals the sum of seat values of all ballots with candidate A the highest ranked hopeful candidate.