Great question - no, it’s not random! They go through every single one of that candidate’s ballot papers, look at the second preferences listed on them, and distribute the surplus pro-rata so that everyone gets the appropriate share. If they did it any other way, a recount could change the result! - ThreadSky

gavreilly.com • 94 days ago

Great question - no, it’s not random! They go through every single one of that candidate’s ballot papers, look at the second preferences listed on them, and distribute the surplus pro-rata so that everyone gets the appropriate share.

If they did it any other way, a recount could change the result!

Reposted from Telekon Obsessed

If say my first preference gets in on the first count, how do they decide the surplus for second preferences? Is it random? Sorry for the probably very stupid question 🥴

Comments

niall-mcauley.bsky.social•90 days ago

No.

johnmayock.bsky.social•94 days ago

On every ballot cast? Or random, on the surplus above the quota? What happens to the votes of an eliminated candidate ? Are all the ballots redistributed?

nemescontent.bsky.social•91 days ago

Weighted Inclusive Gregory method then? 👀

mtottenham.bsky.social•94 days ago

Instead of electronic voting, where there’s no record, could there not be electronic counting? Where the ballot papers are fed into a machine, like the lotto. It would be quicker but could be audited.

tinydonkey.bsky.social•94 days ago

On handwritten ballots? Nightmare. OCR is good for printed stuff but still fails, handwriting recognition is not as good, and it's too important to leave to machines getting it right ~80% of the time.

smce82.bsky.social•94 days ago

Could machine sort and then hand check to speed things up.

frankcourtney.bsky.social•94 days ago

This would be my preference. Best of both worlds. Would remove some of the "dramatic" aspects of manual counts though.

thriveabetes.bsky.social•94 days ago

You shared a great explainer thread for the LE that really helped me explain how to vote to my eldest. Would u share this again pls? My youngest is now a newly minted voter & I can’t remember 😬

brightcircuit.bsky.social•94 days ago

God I love PR-STV. Imagine what a disaster it would've been if FF had succeeded in abolishing it when they tried to and we were stuck with the FF and FG duopoly ingrained in the electoral system. That would be bleak.

barrysguidedtours.bsky.social•94 days ago

But, Gavan.
If quota 10k, candidate A gets 11k, candidate B gets 500 of A's surplus, needs only 300. How do they ensure the 500 to B aren't chosen from the same geographic boxes, thereby potentially skewing his surplus 200 3rd preferences towards one particular candidate?

conf101.bsky.social•94 days ago

This is the bit that confuses me. The first surplus is pretty clear. But when you go beyond second choice it's hard to understand how it works

johdal.bsky.social•94 days ago

Again, Richard Sinnott: “the defence of this procedure is that the counting process requires that the papers be thoroughly mixed at the outset and that, therefore, that the set of papers transferred…is a random sample of the entire sub-parcel.”

barrysguidedtours.bsky.social•94 days ago

Cheers John

ccgambit.bsky.social•94 days ago

So for simplicity sake. If quota is 80 and #1 gets 100. We go through the papers and find candidates #2 has 50%. Does that then mean 10 vote surplus gets added to them?

frankcourtney.bsky.social•94 days ago

Is there not an element of randomness in 3rd and subsequent counts, as only some of the ballots are used (the excess ones that brought them over the quota ?). This has always confused me.

johdal.bsky.social•94 days ago

From Richard Sinnott’s ‘The electoral System’: “The approach to the distribution of a surplus that arises on a count subsequent to the first count is the same as that which applies to a surplus that arises on the first count, except that the votes that are examined for next preferences…

johdal.bsky.social•94 days ago

…are not the entire block of votes credited to the elected candidate at that stage but the votes in the ‘sub-parcel last received’ by him or her.

frankcourtney.bsky.social•94 days ago

Yes - I thought this is where the element of randomness arises. Even with a recount, it would be the same bunch of randomly selected votes being recounted.

eoinmcunningham.bsky.social•94 days ago

Oh, I’ve always assumed it was random. This way is better.

kevinteljeur.bsky.social•94 days ago

Is the surplus for candidates who exceed the quota allocated randomly?

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply