Talk:Anti-plurality voting: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 10:25, 7 February 2017

Combining APV and AV?

Is there a method which combines Anti-plurality voting with Instant-runoff voting? Perhaps "Transferable elimination voting". So in the Tennessee example, the first round would be

58% Memphis, 42% Knoxville, 0% Nashville, 0% Chattanooga

Memphis is eliminated so the next round is

68% Knoxville, 32% Nashville, 0% Chattanooga

Knoxville is eliminated so the next round is

32% Nashville, 68% Chattanooga

Chattanooga is eliminated and so Nashville wins --Henrygb 12:09, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thinking further, I suspect this produces the same result as Coombs' method --Henrygb 15:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While it produces different results, sometimes (SEE LATER), this hypothetical Anti-plurality voting with Instant-runoff voting is not famous enough to warrant, its own wikipedia article.

About this new voting system, leading to different results, if you imagine this situation:

40% a>b>c>d

31% c>d>a>b

29% d>c>b>a

C wins under Coombs' method, and A wins under anti plularity instand-runoff.177.92.128.26 (talk) 10:25, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 :Thinking further, I suspect this produces the same result as [[Coombs' method]] --[[User:Henrygb|Henrygb]] 15:14, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
+::While it produces different results, sometimes (SEE LATER), this hypothetical [[Anti-plurality voting]] with [[Instant-runoff voting]] is not famous enough to warrant, its own wikipedia article.
+::About this new voting system, leading to different results, if you imagine this situation:
+::40% a>b>c>d
+::31% c>d>a>b
+::29% d>c>b>a
+::C wins under [[Coombs' method]], and A wins under anti plularity instand-runoff.[[Special:Contributions/177.92.128.26|177.92.128.26]] ([[User talk:177.92.128.26|talk]]) 10:25, 7 February 2017 (UTC)