Score Voting used in German Pirate Party
58 views
Skip to first unread message
Clay Shentrup
May 30, 2012, 2:21:17 AM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
You may have heard that the Pirate Party won 20 seats (7.8% of the vote) in Germany's largest state, North Rhine-Westphalia, on May 13, 2012.
Those elected officials then used Score Voting to pick the chairman and other posts, listed here:
The election rules, mentioning "scored voting", are listed here:
(4) When dialing the Scored-voting procedure is used: Each voting member shall, in any of election candidate points on an integer scale ranging from "-3" to "0" to "+3" award. The candidate, who accumulated the highest positive point value can combine to himself. (5) Achieved in any ballot no candidate has a cumulative positive score, the ballot pursuant to § 3 paragraph 4 is repeated. For this second round, the candidate list by the Returning Officer reopened. (6) If two or more candidates have exactly the same score will be performed between a ballot in accordance with § 3 para 4. (7) Is there only one candidate for one of besetzendes Ministry is the output of yes and no votes to be provided.Chosen in this case, who can more than yes-no votes on the combine.
Clay Shentrup
May 30, 2012, 2:24:28 AM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
Results are from page 98 down.
- stellvertretende Fraktionsvorsitzende
- [[Benutzer:Bobby79|Robert Stein]] 0
- [[benutzer:Kreon|Oliver bayer]] 5
- [[benutzer:ringwraith|Simone Brand]] 18
- [[Benutzer:Thoth23|Olaf Wegner]] -9
- [[Benutzer:LucaL|Lukas Lamla]] 18
- [[Benutzer:DSLawFox|Dietmar Schulz]] -22
- [[Benutzer:netnrd|Daniel Schwerd]] -2
- Pauls Stellvertreter sind Simone Brand und Lukas Lamla.
- Parlamentarischer Geschäftsführer
- [[Benutzer:Orangebay|Frank Herrmann]] 0
- [[Benutzer:moni|Monika Pieper]]34
- [[Benutzer:mmarsching|Michele Marsching]] -6
- Parlamentarische Geschäftsführerin ist Monika Pieper.
- stellvertretender parlamentarischer Geschäftsführer
- [[Benutzer:Bobby79|Robert Stein]] -10
- [[Benutzer:Orangebay|Frank Herrmann]] 25
- [[Benutzer:toso|Torsten Sommer]] 3
- [[Benutzer:TeilerDoehrden|Nico Kern]] -5
- [[Benutzer:mmarsching|Michele Marsching]] -3
- Stellvertreter ist Frank Herrmann.
Clay Shentrup
May 30, 2012, 2:37:41 AM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
It looks like my blog post had something to do with this. :)
@ClayShentrup I assume@mmarschingmade your day, cause the rules look like his comment to your blogpost. -3..+3 /cc@teilerdoehrden
Mr. Marsching, head of the NRW pirates (and also now state parliamentarian, who was 4th on the party list when they won 20 seats in May) commented on that post after I sent it to him on Twitter. Amazing what the Internet can do for a niche cause like this.
Julian Mehnle
May 30, 2012, 3:10:05 AM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
By Clay's request, I've translated the relevant excerpt of the NRW parliamentary Pirate group's statutes. Mind you, I'm not a professional translator of legal documents. Also, some of their wording lacks clarity or even is ambiguous. Anyway:
§1 General
These election regulations complement the regulations on §9 of the statutes of the Pirates group in the NRW state assembly.
§2 Votes
(1) Votes are generally held in public. But for any operation of law, votes are conducted using an agreed on sign of voting. Any member of the group may request an anonymous vote.
(2) Prior to each vote the chair determines the number of group members eligible to vote. Any changes [occurring during the course of the session] are to be announced.
(3) Votes shall be conducted via the approval voting method. Each member eligible to vote may cast a vote for each of the candidate options. The option receiving the largest number of votes from an absolute majority of members present wins.
(4) If in the first round none of the candidate options receive votes from an absolute majority of members present, a second run-off round shall be conducted, with only the first and second ranked options as candidates.
(5) If in the first round, or the second round per paragraph 4, multiple options equally receive the largest number of votes from an absolute majority of members present, another run-off round shall be conducted with all these options as candidates, then requiring only a simple majority.
(6) In case none of the candidate options receives a simple majority by the third round, the vote shall be adjourned.
§3 Elections to Offices
(1) In order to conduct elections to offices extending past the duration of a single session, the parliamentary group shall elect an election supervisor. The supervisor shall not be a running candidate in any of the elections he is to supervise.
(2) All group members present are automatically candidates in any election. Additionally, members absent may declare their candidacy prior to the election. Any member may declare their refusal to run.
(3) Elections are anonymous. After ballots have been counted in public, the election supervisor shall announce the complete results of the election. This shall include the number of members eligible to vote, the number of spoiled ballots and abstentions, and the number of votes received by each candidate.
(4) Elections shall be conducted via the score voting method. Each member eligible to vote may allocate a number of points on a scale ranging from -3 through 0 up to +3 to each candidate. The candidate with the largest total number of points wins.
(5) If in any round none of the candidates receives a positive total number of points, another round shall be conducted per §3, paragraph 4. For this round the list of candidates shall be reopened.
(6) If two or more candidates receive an equal total number of points, a run-off round shall be conducted between these per §3, paragraph 4.
(7) In case there is only a single candidate in an election, simple yes/no ballots shall be cast. The candidate wins if they receive a simple majority of the votes.
§1 General
These election regulations complement the regulations on §9 of the statutes of the Pirates group in the NRW state assembly.
§2 Votes
(1) Votes are generally held in public. But for any operation of law, votes are conducted using an agreed on sign of voting. Any member of the group may request an anonymous vote.
(2) Prior to each vote the chair determines the number of group members eligible to vote. Any changes [occurring during the course of the session] are to be announced.
(3) Votes shall be conducted via the approval voting method. Each member eligible to vote may cast a vote for each of the candidate options. The option receiving the largest number of votes from an absolute majority of members present wins.
(4) If in the first round none of the candidate options receive votes from an absolute majority of members present, a second run-off round shall be conducted, with only the first and second ranked options as candidates.
(5) If in the first round, or the second round per paragraph 4, multiple options equally receive the largest number of votes from an absolute majority of members present, another run-off round shall be conducted with all these options as candidates, then requiring only a simple majority.
(6) In case none of the candidate options receives a simple majority by the third round, the vote shall be adjourned.
§3 Elections to Offices
(1) In order to conduct elections to offices extending past the duration of a single session, the parliamentary group shall elect an election supervisor. The supervisor shall not be a running candidate in any of the elections he is to supervise.
(2) All group members present are automatically candidates in any election. Additionally, members absent may declare their candidacy prior to the election. Any member may declare their refusal to run.
(3) Elections are anonymous. After ballots have been counted in public, the election supervisor shall announce the complete results of the election. This shall include the number of members eligible to vote, the number of spoiled ballots and abstentions, and the number of votes received by each candidate.
(4) Elections shall be conducted via the score voting method. Each member eligible to vote may allocate a number of points on a scale ranging from -3 through 0 up to +3 to each candidate. The candidate with the largest total number of points wins.
(5) If in any round none of the candidates receives a positive total number of points, another round shall be conducted per §3, paragraph 4. For this round the list of candidates shall be reopened.
(6) If two or more candidates receive an equal total number of points, a run-off round shall be conducted between these per §3, paragraph 4.
(7) In case there is only a single candidate in an election, simple yes/no ballots shall be cast. The candidate wins if they receive a simple majority of the votes.
Jameson Quinn
May 30, 2012, 8:57:57 AM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
This is excellent news! It looks as if the particular elections are generally uncontroversial; that is, so far, one candidate is so far ahead that they'd win in any reasonable voting system. I look forward to seeing Range show its true strength in a closer election! (And I expect that in intraparty elections like this, where things are "friendlier" because everyone's on the same "team", Range will show its greatest strengths, not its not-as-strong-points re strategy.)
Jameson
2012/5/30 Clay Shentrup <cl...@electology.org>
“⸘Ŭalabio‽”
May 30, 2012, 1:53:24 PM5/30/12
to The Center for Election Science
On May 30, 6:21 am, Clay Shentrup <c...@electology.org> wrote:
> (4) When dialing the Scored-voting procedure is used: Each voting member
> shall, in any of election candidate points on an integer scale ranging from "-3" to
> "0" to "+3" award.
¿Why stop at only an absolute value of only 3? If we shall use only
> (4) When dialing the Scored-voting procedure is used: Each voting member
> shall, in any of election candidate points on an integer scale ranging from "-3" to
> "0" to "+3" award.
decimal numbers and single-digit numbers, we might as well use 9:
(4) When dialing the Scored-voting procedure is used: Each voting
member shall, in any of election candidate points on an integer scale
Bruce Gilson
May 30, 2012, 2:39:15 PM5/30/12
to electio...@googlegroups.com
Sean Walker
May 30, 2012, 4:10:49 PM5/30/12
to The Center for Election Science
Except that there is a key difference between the two. The jump from
Approval to Score of any type is a small but notable increase in
complexity. The jump in complexity between -3 to 3 and -9 to 9 is
nonexistant, and the choice of 3 as a max seems rather arbitrary. It's
not that 7 points isn't good enough, it's that there's no reason
(aside from ballot construction) to go only that far, and some minor
benefits to going farther.
On May 30, 11:39 am, Bruce Gilson <brgs...@gmail.com> wrote:
Approval to Score of any type is a small but notable increase in
complexity. The jump in complexity between -3 to 3 and -9 to 9 is
nonexistant, and the choice of 3 as a max seems rather arbitrary. It's
not that 7 points isn't good enough, it's that there's no reason
(aside from ballot construction) to go only that far, and some minor
benefits to going farther.
On May 30, 11:39 am, Bruce Gilson <brgs...@gmail.com> wrote:
“⸘Ŭalabio‽”
May 30, 2012, 4:56:33 PM5/30/12
to The Center for Election Science
On May 30, 6:39 pm, Bruce Gilson <brgs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:53 PM, “⸘Ŭalabio‽” <wala...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 30, 6:21 am, Clay Shentrup <c...@electology.org> wrote:
>> ¿Why stop at only an absolute value of only 3? If we shall use only decimal numbers and single-digit numbers, we might as well use 9:
digit numbers anyway. It would be very little effort to expand the
range to all decimal single-digit numbers. Expanding the range would
improve the scale, so we might as well do so.
As an aside, I sense anger. I assure you that our disagreements are
not personal. I attack the idea —— Not the man. Indeed, I put off
attacking the idea because I feared that doing so might come off as an
attack against the man.
> On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 1:53 PM, “⸘Ŭalabio‽” <wala...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On May 30, 6:21 am, Clay Shentrup <c...@electology.org> wrote:
>> ¿Why stop at only an absolute value of only 3? If we shall use only decimal numbers and single-digit numbers, we might as well use 9:
> Weird. You complain that I'm looking for perfection when I say 0 and 1 are not enough choices. But a 7-point scale isn't good enough for you.
The difference is that we already use an integer-scale with single-
digit numbers anyway. It would be very little effort to expand the
range to all decimal single-digit numbers. Expanding the range would
improve the scale, so we might as well do so.
As an aside, I sense anger. I assure you that our disagreements are
not personal. I attack the idea —— Not the man. Indeed, I put off
attacking the idea because I feared that doing so might come off as an
attack against the man.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages