> I think that Fargo's choice of denominator is at least as defensible as > the denominator that Moore wants them to use. I agree in theory, except it's not my decision, and the baseline was indeed outlined already. See https://reformfargo.org/faq on the design of the reform, under the question "Why do the results for the multi-winner races in N.D. always seem off?" They explain how voting percentage results affect perceptions of the outcome, which we all know well, and then state very clearly: *"In order for percentages for any multi-winner race to be reported in a non-misleading fashion, they should be calculated as "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-voters-engaged-in-race" or "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-ballots-cast".* *For our ballot initiative, we chose to mandate that percentages be calculated with "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-ballots-cast" for two reasons: 1) Current Cass county election equipment is not capable of providing "total-voters-engaged-in-race" and; 2) we want to shed light on the lack of engagement many races receive and fight the skew that occurs when facing the first scenario we outlined above." * It's quite difficult to know which questions to preemptively address, so I hope this helps, and I'm glad to answer more if you have them! EM

I think the original total of 18,805 is most likely correct. In particular, these new figures seem to accidentally include voters outside of Fargo. However, I can't be sure. >From the CES Discord: > Comparing the two documents provided, > https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Z_BvcFSb9atksfTEBvtT29Jrn_2kOaIa/view > and > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1SjeCOPnc8_XahPknSaln_2BAekAUEe2I/edit?pli=1&gid=491089553#gid=491089553 > I can see that *precinct 4503 supposedly had 437 ballots in 2020, but > there was not a single vote for any candidate in the commissioner's race > from this precinct.* Precinct 4502 shows 508 ballots in the first doc, > but only 16 votes for all candidates combined. These results seem > improbable if precincts 4502 and 4503 contained Fargo ballots, and _only_ > Fargo ballots. These two precincts contribute only 945 ballots to the > alleged discrepency, but they do show that there is a problem with the > methodology. My guess is the figures differ because of split precincts—totaling up the number of votes in each precinct won't give the correct turnout, if some precincts serve voters both inside and outside of Fargo. On Sun, Jun 9, 2024 at 2:26 AM Evangeline Moore <evangeline.moore@ih21.org> wrote: > > I think that Fargo's choice of denominator is at least as defensible as > > the denominator that Moore wants them to use. > > I agree in theory, except it's not my decision, and the baseline was > indeed outlined already. See https://reformfargo.org/faq on the design of > the reform, under the question "Why do the results for the multi-winner > races in N.D. always seem off?" > > They explain how voting percentage results affect perceptions of the > outcome, which we all know well, and then state very clearly: > *"In order for percentages for any multi-winner race to be reported in a > non-misleading fashion, they should be calculated as > "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-voters-engaged-in-race" or > "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-ballots-cast".* > > *For our ballot initiative, we chose to mandate that percentages be > calculated with "total-votes-for-candidate-X / total-ballots-cast" for two > reasons: 1) Current Cass county election equipment is not capable of > providing "total-voters-engaged-in-race" and; 2) we want to shed light on > the lack of engagement many races receive and fight the skew that occurs > when facing the first scenario we outlined above." * > > It's quite difficult to know which questions to preemptively address, so I > hope this helps, and I'm glad to answer more if you have them! > > EM > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list > info >