On 02/05/2011 23:55, Roger Mills wrote:
On 02/05/2011 23:07, Old Codger wrote:
On 02/05/2011 22:35, Roger Mills wrote:


There is a world of difference between a vote being *counted* more
than
once and *counting* more than once. Any vote transferred from an
eliminated candidate still only counts as one vote in the final
scheme
of things. Otherwise, the total votes cast for the non-eliminated
candidates would exceed the number of voters - which it clearly
doesn't!

But AV means that everyone will vote for 2, 3, 4, 5 or even more
candidates. Some folk will have each of their 5 or more votes
counted. I
call that having 2, 3, 4, 5 or even more votes.


No - because every time their vote is transferred, their previous vote
is *discounted* - so they're still only left with *one* vote.

An artificial construct.


Please explain what you mean!

Each vote for each candidate is counted, it may then be officially
discarded but it was counted in order to decide to discard it.


But I've already explained the difference between count*ed* and
count*ing*! What part of that don't you understand? g

I don't understand why you consider a statement that "There is a world
of difference between a vote being *counted* more than
once and *counting* more than once. Any vote transferred from an
eliminated candidate still only counts as one vote in the final scheme
of things. Otherwise, the total votes cast for the non-eliminated
candidates would exceed the number of voters - which it clearly
doesn't!" is an explanation.

Voting for candidate 6, then candidate 3, then candidate 5, and finally
candidate 4 enables the voter to vote 4 times, it still gives candidate
4 only a single vot from that voter. The voter has his cake and eats it.

--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]

On 03/05/2011 21:03, Old Codger wrote:


I don't understand why you consider a statement that "There is a world
of difference between a vote being *counted* more than
once and *counting* more than once. Any vote transferred from an
eliminated candidate still only counts as one vote in the final scheme
of things. Otherwise, the total votes cast for the non-eliminated
candidates would exceed the number of voters - which it clearly
doesn't!" is an explanation.

Voting for candidate 6, then candidate 3, then candidate 5, and finally
candidate 4 enables the voter to vote 4 times, it still gives candidate
4 only a single vot from that voter. The voter has his cake and eats it.


But, every time a candidate is eliminated, votes for that candidate are
cancelled and transferred elsewhere. At any point in time, each voter
only has one *active* vote. If your first preference is for a candidate
who *doesn't get eliminated, your active vote stays with that candidate
and, in effect, gets re-confirmed at each round of voting. The effect is
very similar to physically voting in each round (which, of course, would
not be feasible on a national scale).
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On 03/05/2011 23:04, Roger Mills wrote:
On 03/05/2011 21:03, Old Codger wrote:


I don't understand why you consider a statement that "There is a world
of difference between a vote being *counted* more than
once and *counting* more than once. Any vote transferred from an
eliminated candidate still only counts as one vote in the final scheme
of things. Otherwise, the total votes cast for the non-eliminated
candidates would exceed the number of voters - which it clearly
doesn't!" is an explanation.

Voting for candidate 6, then candidate 3, then candidate 5, and finally
candidate 4 enables the voter to vote 4 times, it still gives candidate
4 only a single vot from that voter. The voter has his cake and eats it.


But, every time a candidate is eliminated, votes for that candidate are
cancelled and transferred elsewhere.

As I have said before, purely a construct.

At any point in time, each voter only has one *active* vote. If your first preference is for a candidate
who *doesn't get eliminated, your active vote stays with that candidate
and, in effect, gets re-confirmed at each round of voting. The effect is
very similar to physically voting in each round (which, of course, would
not be feasible on a national scale).

If there was physical voting for each round everyone would have the
opportunity to reconsider their vote in the changed circumstances that
apply each time. I would however agree that the minor improvement over
FPTP would not warrant the vast increase in cost involved.


--
Old Codger
e-mail use reply to field

What matters in politics is not what happens, but what you can make
people believe has happened. [Janet Daley 27/8/2003]