Re: Precinct canvassing and ranked-order

From: Douglas W. Jones <jones_at_cs_dot_uiowa_dot_edu>
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 09:13:42 CDT

On Apr 29, 2004, at 4:08 PM, David Mertz wrote:

> I'm sure Doug must mean something other than what this seems to say
> (on my reading). It looks like he is suggesting that a total of first
> place, second place, etc. votes at a precinct contains enough
> information to decide an IRV winner at an aggregate level.

No, what it provides is enough information to perform, with little work,
a strong check on the transmission of the data.

You can't decide an STV/IRV race without aggregating all the ballots
from
all the precincts and then doing the transfer of votes from candidate
to candidate until someone gets the majority.

The problem is, what short summary of results at the precinct can you
publish to allow members of the public, observing at that precinct, to
assure themselves that the results from that precinct have been properly
incorporated into the district-wide result. It has to be a summary
result, something you can post on the wall, something that an observer
can copy down with pencil and paper in a minute and check against the
published precinct data in tomorrow's newspaper.

                Doug Jones
                jones@cs.uiowa.edu
==================================================================
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain
==================================================================
Received on Fri Apr 30 23:17:26 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 23:17:29 CDT