Stuff:Multi-winner electoral system
From Wiki
This page documents the modern multi-winner electoral system as a generic design for broad-based decision guidance. This unconventional view of a conventional electoral system is mainly intended as a comparative reference.
- URL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_systems#Multiple-winner_methods)
- Currency of guidance (consensus) 1
- Date (1792) 2
- Is candidate mutable (false) 3
- Is inclusive (true) 4
- Issue type (Category:Multiple offices) 5
- Purpose (Stuff:Decision) 6
- Stage (production) 7
- Temporal continuity (punctual) 3
- Width (877) 8
Notes
- ^ The modern electoral system is conventionally vote based.
- ^ Accepting Thomas Jefferson's priority in the design of the D'Hondt method. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=D%27Hondt_method&oldid=565626338
- ^ a b A traditional electoral system has punctual votes. As generally in this case, the candidates are immutable. It matters not whether we view the candidates as persons or party lists; the choices on offer to the electorate do not change as the voting progresses.
- ^ Modern elections tend to "universal suffrage".
- ^ This is the purpose of a multi-winner electoral system.
- ^ The purpose is to decide the election.
- ^ It is a traditional system, long established.
- ^ Some multi-winner methods might be adapted to allow for write-in candidates. Typical electoral rules do not permit this, however, so we exclude write-in candidates from this generic design. The elector's range of choice may be large, but not unbounded.
