Talk:Instant Runoff Voting
My edit is from WP; does anyone know if the coup in Fiji is over? I don't want to have that in there if they're not actually having elections. Researcher 18:07, 12 December 2007 (EST)
- Well in a very real sense, a coup in Fiji is never over, there may be a pause before the next coup, but that's hardly the same thing. However as I understand it elections that were promised for about March this year, and rescheduled for late this year will now take place early next year (I promise), but don't quote me on that.--Damo2353 02:21, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
- After some actual research, it appears that elections are scheduled for March of 2009, of course if you believe, that I have a bridge you might be interested in--Damo2353 02:25, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
Contents |
[edit] Modern computing
Runoff voting predates current levels of computing power. I not too shore if that is a very good description. 02:11, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
- True, but modern high speed computing makes working out the results a lot easier and quicker. Of course, we've also had "high speed computers" for what, fifty-odd years now? And before that we had some pretty decent mechanical things that could do the job. To my mind, the modern computer makes the "complexity" of the system less of a big deal to the average voter, if nothing else. ħuman
14:56, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
[edit] Labor v Labour
To prevent further confusion (by me) it is the Australian Labor Party and the Democratic Labour Party. 
06:48, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
[edit] Not down here...
re this edit, it should be noted that NZ does not have instant run off voting. Acei9 23:36, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- Another good reason to revert. You have mixed-members right? - π 23:40, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- yup. Acei9 23:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
- D'oh! Oh well. I meant to get across that the typical voter doesn't understand it even where it's used - David Gerard (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- The typical voter doesn't even understand most simpler systems. I understand IRV, although only from reading about it. ħuman
01:05, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- The typical voter doesn't even understand most simpler systems. I understand IRV, although only from reading about it. ħuman
- D'oh! Oh well. I meant to get across that the typical voter doesn't understand it even where it's used - David Gerard (talk) 00:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- yup. Acei9 23:42, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
[edit] No2AV
Let me know if this isn't the right place but those campaign points are practically PRATTs now. ADK...I'll edify your TK! 14:29, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
[edit] One likely outcome
'I will vote for (Monster Raving Loony Party/other offbeat candidate of choice, and my 'real' party second...'
Having an elected chamber composed entirely of 'fun party MPs' (who have received 90%+ of the votes each) would be interesting. 171.33.222.26 (talk) 15:41, 5 August 2013 (UTC)