"Consulate" of The South Pacific
This region had relations with Wintreath before our policy of providing a topic consulate for non-allied regions. This "consulate" consists of threads from this region's former embassy merged together to serve as an archive, so that it can be accessed as part of our current system. -Wintermoot
Quite fascinating, as I know of TheStonedSurfers from my time in Spiritus. A small world it is. In any case, I'm sorry you'll no longer be able to serve as ambassador. I was looking forward to seeing you around more often, but I suppose that's just the way it goes. Farewell!
Hello, welcome to Wintreath! I advise a coat, I expect you'll find it harder to adjust to the weather than Kringle did. :P
[17:18:38] <+Eluvatar> what alternative voting are you considering for the Unterhusen, out of curiosity?
[17:19:11] <+Eluvatar> nm found the discussion topic
[17:19:18] <+Chanku> http://wintreath.com/forums/index.php?topic=1849.msg27091#msg27091 (http://wintreath.com/forums/index.php?topic=1849.msg27091#msg27091)
[17:19:20] <+Zaphyr> [ Mapping the World! ] - http://wintreath.com (http://wintreath.com)
[17:19:44] <+Eluvatar> o_o
[17:19:50] <+Chanku> ?
[17:20:22] <+Eluvatar> the weirded out face is re: http://wintreath.com/forums/index.php?topic=1833.0 (http://wintreath.com/forums/index.php?topic=1833.0) not the map link
[17:20:25] <+Zaphyr> [ Proportional Voting? ] - http://wintreath.com (http://wintreath.com)
[17:21:08] <+Eluvatar> Wintermoot, would the provision of some general information as a foreigner who has done a lot of thinking and experimenting with voting theory be welcomed in that topic? :$
[17:22:19] <@Wintermoot> Heyo...I'm not sure if non-Citizens can post in that forum or not, but if you can I have no issue. :P
[17:24:43] <+Chanku> Wintermoot I was Jarl during the time that we closed Embassies with TSP...right?
[17:25:04] <@Wintermoot> I don't recall...I think I made the decision afterwards
[17:25:20] <+Chanku> Actually I was
[17:25:29] <+Chanku> it was part of the embassy restructure that I performed
[17:25:59] <@Wintermoot> I wrote the statement about the closures though
[17:26:04] <+Chanku> Yeah
[17:26:12] <+Chanku> (Although I wanted to do that :/)
[17:26:38] <+Chanku> Although ending relations with TSP is not what I suggested at the time :/
[17:26:42] <+Eluvatar> oh. Yeah. I can't actually reply xD
[17:27:05] <+Eluvatar> I guess I'll leave my thoughts here for y'all :)
[17:28:15] <+Eluvatar> 1. It's probably important to be clear that proportional voting and preferential voting are not exactly the same thing. There's at least one proportional voting method which is not preferential, and a number of possible preferential voting methods which are not proportional.
[17:29:00] <+Eluvatar> Specifically, Single Non-Transferable Vote, where you vote for one candidate and the N (in your case 5, I understand) candidates with the most votes are seated, is a proportional method, particularly assuming tactical voting, but is not a preferential method.
[17:29:46] <+Eluvatar> As to preferential methods which are not proportional, there are a number of possible examples, but I don't see a need to mention them.
[17:30:20] <+Eluvatar> Actually "AV was just the majority" -- AV is a single-seat method in the same family as Single Transferable Vote
[17:30:39] <+Eluvatar> There are 3 terms for the same system, but two of them are generally used to refer to single-winner elections.
[17:31:09] <+Eluvatar> (In the United Kingdom it was proposed to use the "Alternate Vote" for elections within individual constituencies, which would each elect 1 MP to the House of Commons).
[17:31:52] <+Eluvatar> 2. The Single Transferable Vote is no longer in use in TNP because Executive Council elections have been discontinued.
[17:32:17] <+Eluvatar> (Instead the elected Delegate has been appointing their Cabinet.)
[17:33:54] <+Eluvatar> 3. There are at least two different ways to implement STV's elimination and vote transfer process: IRL this is done randomly, which for elections with thousands of votes is pretty fair. In NationStates however, where I've never seen an election with more than 158 votes, when I ran STV elections to TNP's Executive Council I used fractional transfers.
[17:34:26] <@Wintermoot> There was an election with 158 votes? Wow...lol
[17:34:43] <+Eluvatar> I sent ballots to every nation in The North Pacific.
[17:35:01] <+Eluvatar> The first time I did this, it was novel enough that 158 of them voted. The second time, 96 voted if I remember correctly. (Maybe 98)
[17:36:07] <@Wintermoot> We've had at most 24 votes...but we do all our elections on the forums.
[17:36:37] <+Eluvatar> The last TNP Executive Council election, in which only forum-registered members voted, saw 36 votes.
[17:36:54] <@Wintermoot> That's pretty good
[17:36:58] <+Eluvatar> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqCj7Gv_2W_MdFFhZFJGb2F0akEzbVhUWGFGLTd6TGc#gid=1 (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqCj7Gv_2W_MdFFhZFJGb2F0akEzbVhUWGFGLTd6TGc#gid=1)
[17:37:00] <+Zaphyr> [ Executive Council Election February 2013 ] - https://docs.google.com (https://docs.google.com)
[17:37:23] <+Eluvatar> The final seat was won by 0.148 votes >.<
[17:37:56] <@Wintermoot> Oh, an election Gov ran in...shocking. :P
[17:40:12] <+Hugsim> Fractional seems the best with the low numbers of voters we have
[17:40:40] <+Eluvatar> You might want to invalidate sufficiently small margins
[17:40:46] <+Eluvatar> I dunno
[17:41:24] <+Eluvatar> I'd recommend Schulze STV as a less finicky system, but it, ah, can have exponential runtime to evaluate >_>
[17:41:31] <@Wintermoot> I guess I'm going to come off as ignorant, but how can you have a fractional vote? :P
[17:41:41] <+Eluvatar> So the first form is pretty straightforwad
[17:41:47] <+Eluvatar> if someone ranks multiple candidates 1st
[17:41:52] <+Eluvatar> say, 5 candidates
[17:41:59] <+Eluvatar> then each of those candidates gets 1/5 of a vote from them.
[17:42:07] <+Eluvatar> Make sense?
[17:42:23] <+Hugsim> Oh, you allow multiple people with the same rank
[17:42:31] <+Eluvatar> aye
[17:42:41] <@Wintermoot> Oh...I see :P
[17:42:46] <+Chanku> Um...
[17:43:00] <+Eluvatar> The counting method I used applied the same logic to transferring surplus votes from a candidate that makes quota
[17:43:05] * Chanku doesn't understand what I'm looking at on the spreadsheet...
[17:43:17] <+Eluvatar> let me find the textual explanation I posted on the forum...
[17:43:57] <+Chanku> Also Fun-fact: Spritius is also thinking about changing the way they do elections.
[17:44:49] <+Eluvatar> http://pastebin.com/atm0AZAt (http://pastebin.com/atm0AZAt)
[17:44:55] <+Zaphyr> [ Executive Council Results February 2013 - Pastebin.com ] - http://pastebin.com (http://pastebin.com)
[17:48:21] * Chanku is still confused
[17:48:41] <+Eluvatar> The detail I should add is that the voting looked like this:
[17:48:54] <+Eluvatar> http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/voter_ballot/ (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/voter_ballot/)
[17:48:56] <+Zaphyr> [ Voter Ballot ] - http://forum.thenorthpacific.org (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org)
[17:50:12] <@Wintermoot> And nobody accused anyone of being able to manipulate the vote from the backend?
[17:50:37] <+Eluvatar> People usually trust me o.o
[17:50:54] <+Eluvatar> Though technically in this instance it was mcmasterdonia running the system I'd written
[17:51:49] <+Eluvatar> yeah, form (still) points to mcmasterdonia.thenorthpacific.org xD
[17:52:07] <+Chanku> ...
[17:53:13] <+Eluvatar> To be clear, this whole thing was entirely within the Delegates' office's discretion
[17:53:19] <+Eluvatar> There was no law mandating it.
[17:53:54] <+Eluvatar> I imagine it helps that people could find their ballots in the Raw Ballot sheet of the spreadsheet
[17:53:58] * Wuufu has quit (Quit: Don't PanicBNC, I'll be back!)
[17:54:17] * Guest80283 is now known as Henn
[17:54:24] * Spock gives voice to Henn
[17:54:48] <@Wintermoot> That's just something that comes up anytime votes aren't done by public post in NS, it seems lol
[17:55:09] <+Eluvatar> It did come up, but was not discussed for long
[17:55:32] <+Chanku> ...I still don't completely understand
[17:56:15] <+Eluvatar> could you ask a specific question?
[17:56:23] <+Eluvatar> Because I'm not sure what to focus on in trying to explain.
[17:57:14] <+Chanku> Give me a moment
[17:57:25] <+Chanku> alright on this: http://pastebin.com/atm0AZAt (http://pastebin.com/atm0AZAt)
[17:57:26] <+Zaphyr> [ Executive Council Results February 2013 - Pastebin.com ] - http://pastebin.com (http://pastebin.com)
[17:57:37] <+Chanku> I'm confused by the first couple paragraphs...
[17:57:57] <+Eluvatar> If you notice, after all the candidates there's a "Check" column in the results sheet
[17:58:07] <+Eluvatar> Column N
[17:58:34] <+Eluvatar> In each round, the sum total of votes each candidates has must be the total number of votes
[17:58:41] <+Eluvatar> which is what the Check column checks
[17:59:14] * Chanku is a little confused
[17:59:24] <+Eluvatar> There were 36 votes in the election
[17:59:27] <+Chanku> okay
[17:59:37] <+Eluvatar> If you check the Raw Ballots sheet, you'll see them listed.
[17:59:49] <+Chanku> ok
[18:00:04] <+Eluvatar> During each round, each candidate has some portion of these votes.
[18:00:17] <+Eluvatar> The total of all the votes all the candidates have must equal the total number of votes cast.
[18:00:32] <+Eluvatar> (If it doesn't, somebody's vote has been miscounted :P )
[18:01:16] <+Chanku> So someone votes for all canidates placing them on a list using what they would prefer
[18:01:37] <+Eluvatar> Right, as per http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/voter_ballot/ (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/pages/voter_ballot/)
[18:01:38] <+Zaphyr> [ Voter Ballot ] - http://forum.thenorthpacific.org (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org)
[18:01:56] <+Eluvatar> Each candidate gets a ranking from 1 to the number of candidates in the election
[18:02:04] <+Chanku> ok
[18:02:05] <+Eluvatar> with ranking someone 12 being equivalent to not voting for them, period
[18:02:10] <+Chanku> Okay
[18:02:13] <+Eluvatar> (if 12 is the number of candidates)
[18:02:41] <+Chanku> What if someone to were to rank all but one candidate x (Where x is the number of candidates)
[18:03:56] <+Eluvatar> Then their entire vote would go to that candidate
[18:04:01] <+Chanku> Alright
[18:04:17] <+Eluvatar> and if any part of their vote were transferred, it would transfer to all available candidates equally
[18:04:31] <+Eluvatar> .. or not at all
[18:04:39] <+Eluvatar> depending on how that particular step is implemented
[18:04:48] <+Chanku> Explain
[18:05:29] * Eluvatar examines the counting code
[18:05:52] <+Eluvatar> ( http://www.thenorthpacific.org/voter/counter.html (http://www.thenorthpacific.org/voter/counter.html) )
[18:05:53] <+Zaphyr> [ Enscript Output ] - http://www.thenorthpacific.org (http://www.thenorthpacific.org)
[18:08:00] <+Eluvatar> yeah, the way TNP counted it, it would always transfer.
[18:08:06] <+Chanku> um...
[18:08:15] * Chanku looks at the code and just freezes...
[18:08:16] <+Chanku> okay
[18:08:17] <+Chanku> then
[18:08:29] <+Eluvatar> One could alternatively assert that if a candidate were ranked last, or not ranked at all, then the ballot should never be transferred to them, period
[18:08:58] <+Chanku> Alright
[18:09:07] <+Eluvatar> This difference would almost never have any effect, as obviously, the transfer doesn't advantage any candidate over another directly
[18:09:13] <+Eluvatar> as all of them get the same fraction.
[18:09:18] <@Wintermoot> Obviously :P
[18:09:36] <+Eluvatar> The subtle effect the transfer has, is that it could boost a candidate over the quota, where otherwise a candidate would be eliminated next instead.
[18:09:37] <+Chanku> Alright now what if someone ranked all but one candidates as rank 1?
[18:09:57] <+Eluvatar> Then their vote would be distributed equally (1/11th in this case) to all candidates but that one
[18:09:57] <+Hugsim> All of the ones ranked first would divide the vote
[18:10:08] <+Chanku> okay
[18:10:14] <+Eluvatar> and as each of those candidates got seated or eliminated, those fractions would be divided further and redistributed
[18:10:19] <+Chanku> Also this is STV we are talking about..right?
[18:10:31] <+Eluvatar> This is a particular implementation of STV which uses fractional transfers, yes.
[18:10:46] <+Chanku> okay
[18:10:48] <+Eluvatar> IRL, elections use random transfer, and I believe drop ballots if they are "exhausted"
[18:10:58] <+Eluvatar> (have no more candidates ranked [higher than x])
[18:11:32] <+Eluvatar> But as we talked about earlier, when there are only say 36 votes, randomly deciding which ballot of say 8 should be transferred can be a big deal!
[18:11:50] <+Eluvatar> So Gulliver and I used a fractional transfer version of the system.
[18:12:18] <+Chanku> ok
[18:12:18] <+Hugsim> Moot, you should post all the ballots de-identified after the mock election ends
[18:12:25] <+Eluvatar> The most common way proportional voting is done is by political party.
[18:13:04] <+Chanku> Obviously though Wintreath doesn't have Political parties
[18:13:08] <+Eluvatar> Which uses similar calculations to the quota calculation to distribute seats, but does not use any kind of ballot transfer.
[18:13:11] <+Eluvatar> Right.
[18:13:47] <+Chanku> SO that's moot I guess
[18:13:59] * Wintermoot watches the discussion go above Chanku's head. :P
[18:14:35] <+Hugsim> Heh
[18:14:50] <@Wintermoot> I suspect we better go with as simple a system as possible. I was actually thinking of Lazarus's chairman election a few months back...something like that is what I had in mind.
[18:15:08] <+Hugsim> What did they do?
[18:15:18] * Ulkhak (Mibbit@cpe-98-28-121-245.columbus.res.rr.com) has joined #wintreath
[18:15:32] <+Eluvatar> The simplest proportional system is Single Non-Transferable Vote
[18:15:47] <+Eluvatar> Where you vote for one candidate, and the several candidates with the most votes win.
[18:15:55] <@Wintermoot> People voted based on preference, and after each round the person with the least votes was eliminated and those that voted for them had their second preference counted.
[18:16:00] <+Eluvatar> With the ability to change your vote and live counting, it's reasonably fair.
[18:16:26] <+Hugsim> Which is pretty similar to what we have
[18:16:27] <+Eluvatar> That sounds a lot like STV/IRV/AV
[18:16:47] <+Hugsim> We do a Quintuple Non-Transferable Vote :P
[18:17:11] <+Eluvatar> Which is also known as block voting, and tends to result in total domination by the plurality IRL
[18:17:40] <+Eluvatar> (If 50% of the people vote for the same candidates, those candidates /will/ take /all/ of the seats)
[18:17:50] <+Eluvatar> (In practice this can apply for pluralities smaller than 50% too)
[18:18:48] <+Eluvatar> It's been banned in elections to the United States Congress since 1840 because Congress panicked that State Legislatures were going to implement block voting to put in complete state partisan control of the representatives
[18:19:21] <+Chanku> Although now they just gerrymander
[18:19:24] <+Eluvatar> In NS, it doesn't necessarily result in such domination because there may not /be/ such a faction.
[18:19:43] <+Eluvatar> Block voting is far more effective at turning a plurality into complete domination.
[18:19:54] <+Eluvatar> Gerrymandering of course can turn a /minority/ into a /majority/
[18:20:00] <+Eluvatar> which is arguably worse
[18:20:12] <+Eluvatar> One could of course combine them :P
[18:20:16] <+Hugsim> :P
[18:20:31] <+Eluvatar> Draw a master district which is 60% of your party and 40% of the other party and elects 10 seats of your party
[18:20:46] <+Eluvatar> and draw a special gerrymandered district which is 100% of the other party and elects 2 seats
[18:21:13] <+Eluvatar> so you get 10:2 instead of 6:6
[18:21:52] <+Chanku> Anywho
[18:21:58] <+Chanku> changing the subject for no reason
[18:22:04] <+Chanku> What do you guys think of my Maps?
[18:22:10] <+Eluvatar> pretty neat :)
[18:22:13] <+Chanku> Thanks
[18:22:20] <+Chanku> I plan on doing more
[18:22:32] <+Chanku> (essentially the same thing, but without the boarders or overlay
[18:22:50] <+Chanku> I would like if someone could help me map
[18:22:57] <+Chanku> and if more people would form nations on the server
[18:23:26] <+Hugsim> You're pretty knowledgeable about this topic, have you studied it "for real"?
[18:23:48] <+Hugsim> Eluvatar^
[18:23:55] <+Eluvatar> It's my #1 issue that I care about in IRL politics
[18:24:01] <+Chanku> I kinda assumed that Hugsim
July 2012 | Results Topic (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6934379/1/) | Counting Sheet (http://goo.gl/hWlgw) |
August 2012 | Results Topic (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6954433/1/) | Counting Sheet (http://goo.gl/NCmiv) |
November 2012 | Results Topic (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/6990214/1/) | Counting Sheet (http://goo.gl/D6UQg) |
February 2013 | Results Topic (http://forum.thenorthpacific.org/topic/7017534/1/) | Counting Sheet (https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqCj7Gv_2W_MdFFhZFJGb2F0akEzbVhUWGFGLTd6TGc#gid=1) |
Hey Y’all! *dusts off this ancient consulate* I am Katie, your brand-new ambassador from the South Pacific! I’ve been reading through some older FA updates from this thread and needless to say: y’all haven’t seen activity from us in a long time! I sincerely hope to have great fun here in Wintreath, and I will make sure this consulate is at least semi-active again :PSounds great! We look forward to the new life with great anticipation! :P