 | | Re: Instant Runoff Voting —Jude Beaudin
|
| | | (...) In a perfect world it would work. But I doubt people would not readily accept that type of voting because you have to think of how you fill out the ballot. Also, you still end up with situations of people purposely spoiling ballots, i.e. (...) (22 years ago, 7-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Instant Runoff Voting —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) Yes, perish the thought, voters actually being asked to think! Grin. (...) That's a spoiled ballot anyway, no different than now. (...) Good! (22 years ago, 8-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Instant Runoff Voting —Simon Bennett
|
| | | | (...) Surely it is actually still a vote until that candidate is chucked out. It is no different to only writing in the first choice and leaving the rest blank. This method is the way my University (and I think all UK Universities) elect Sabbatical (...) (22 years ago, 8-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Instant Runoff Voting —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | (...) I would tend to agree.... the only way I would say the ballot would be spoiled would be if it was not clear what was intended. If I voted 1-A, 2-B and 3-A (again) that might be argued to be ambiguous. (or might not) To Ross, I'm not sure (...) (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Instant Runoff Voting —Ross Crawford
|
| | | | (...) Ummm, I guess that would be the "give all the ones you dont want in a good hip & shoulders" voting system 8?) Didn't they use a variant of that technique in chicago many years ago? ROSCO (22 years ago, 9-Aug-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
