"Roger Mills" wrote in message
...
On 03/05/2011 21:08, John Williamson wrote:
Roger Mills wrote:


See the whole thing illustrated rather cleverly in Dan Snow's video,
to be screened on TV this evening - and available he
http://www.yestofairervotes.org/page...03DanSnowEmail

Doesn't match my experience of such things. Beer or coffee? Okay, which
pub/ coffeshop? But that's not really relevant to Parliament.


It was just an illustration of choosing between alternatives - and is
equally applicable to drinking venues and parliamentary candidates.

When there were just 2 venues/candidates - no problem, simple majority
sorts it.

But when there are multiple options/candidates, this doesn't work. In the
FPTP illustration, the coffee shop won even though more people wanted to
go *a* (though not the same) pub. When they applied some sort of AV (I
didn't quite understand the methodology) they ended up going to a pub that
everyone was happy with.

But didn't they move the goalposts?
3 pubs were involved and only 1 coffee shop.
So, to defeat the coffee bods, the drinkers got together and decided that
ANY pub was better than coffee.
A really crap example, IMHO.
In any event, however the government is decided, Joe public will be crapped
upon, guaranteed.
Maybe a blindfold and a pin?

When there are multiple candidates in an election, simply choosing the
person with the most votes even though they are way short of 50% isn't the
best way of finding the candidate whom most people are happy with.