PRSTV - Our voting system explained

Charles Babbage · 08-02-2020 10:50pm

seamus wrote: »

OCR software will always have misreadings (reading a 2 as a 1, etc).

Human Counters have misreadings and could have bias.
OCR software is now common, you count the papers with two different programs and automatically look for bias. The software could be set to a low ambiguity level with any iffy ballots being examined manually.

dulpit · 09-02-2020 12:05am

Collie D wrote: »

Questions for staff at polling stations.

Are you there for the duration of polls being open or are there two shifts?

I believe the answer is the former and if so...how and when do you cast your own vote?

They are there the whole day. They can get a postal vote or, if they are working in the same constituency as their own, they can transfer their vote to the box they are working and vote there.

Source: my mum, who did this for years.

OAOB · 09-02-2020 8:06am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Human Counters have misreadings and could have bias.
OCR software is now common, you count the papers with two different programs and automatically look for bias. The software could be set to a low ambiguity level with any iffy ballots being examined manually.

In our system every vote is checked twice; first is at the sorting boxes where you distribute the vote and then every vote is rechecked at tables to ensure they have been distributed correctly. For bias to come into it you would need two random counters to have the same bias and be willing to take the risk of altering the results. To be honest i couldn't actually imagine it happening

Mad_maxx · 09-02-2020 11:01am

its a balls of an electoral system , hate it , results in parish pump clientelism and endless fudge due to too much compromise being required

only one other state uses it , malta

Markcheese · 09-02-2020 11:15am

https://youtu.be/LkH2r-sNjQs

This guy is a bit of a techie ,/ computer nerd , but the video is why he thinks electronic voting ,and counting is a bad idea ...

Markcheese · 09-02-2020 11:20am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

its a balls of an electoral system , hate it , results in parish pump clientelism and endless fudge due to too much compromise being required

only one other state uses it , malta

I'm not sure is our system that results in this or us ?

Say we moved to first past the post , would Micheal Healy Ray ,Michael Lowry and shane Ross ect all still get voted in ? Probably ...
A list system ? You don't get to vote for a candidate at all ,you just vote a party ,but then you still get the Maria Bailey's ect ...

Mad_maxx · 09-02-2020 11:26am

Markcheese wrote: »

I'm not sure is our system that results in this or us ?

Say we moved to first past the post , would Micheal Healy Ray ,Michael Lowry and shane Ross ect all still get voted in ? Probably ...
A list system ? You don't get to vote for a candidate at all ,you just vote a party ,but then you still get the Maria Bailey's ect ...

our system gives rise to sitting TD,s having to constantly look over their shoulder towards local cheap populists who hype local issues

Markcheese · 09-02-2020 11:34am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

our system gives rise to sitting TD,s having to constantly look over their shoulder towards local cheap populists who hype local issues

Other than a dictatorship.... Don't all directly elected systems have this as a problem ...

Mad_maxx · 09-02-2020 1:20pm

Markcheese wrote: »

Other than a dictatorship.... Don't all directly elected systems have this as a problem ...

No they do not, in the UK, it's unheard of for an MP to deal with pothole and medical card issues

Montage of Feck · 09-02-2020 1:27pm

Donnielighto wrote: »

Electronic ones could do it better but then youve a whole other set of issues that crop up. Happy with the current setup.

The election count is my favourite part.

Capt'n Midnight · 09-02-2020 1:44pm

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Human Counters have misreadings and could have bias.
OCR software is now common, you count the papers with two different programs and automatically look for bias. The software could be set to a low ambiguity level with any iffy ballots being examined manually.

The OCR bit it to determine which pile to put the papers in.

Right now about 50 seats are too close to call. You don't want Black Boxes and AI working in that wiggle room.

Some times I write a 7 like an upside down L other times I'll put a line through it. If I'm being fancy I'll start with an upward tick.

Closed 4's open 4's, open 4's that kinda look like 11's but there's already a very clear 11 on the sheet.

Besides Human Counters are well supervised.

https://twitter.com/anniewestdotcom/status/122643201506453504

seamus · 10-02-2020 10:45am

Mad_maxx wrote: »

our system gives rise to sitting TD,s having to constantly look over their shoulder towards local cheap populists who hype local issues

Markcheese wrote: »

Other than a dictatorship.... Don't all directly elected systems have this as a problem ...

No, all other systems don't have this problem.

But it's not an issue with our counting mechanism or our method of voting. It's about the distribution of power.

Our local authorities basically can't even fart without approval from the central exchequer. This was the deliberate intention of changes made in the 1970s that moved lots of local powers to the Dáil, because crooks like Haughey and his ilk realised that the best way to take national power was to be popular with the locals.
It would also ensure that local politicians couldn't get "above their station" by doing things that the Dáil disagreed with. Up-and-coming candidates could only become as popular as the local TD would allow them.

This is why so many people get elected to local government and then immediately seek election to the Dáil at the next opportunity.

Quantum Erasure · 10-02-2020 11:57am

Charles Babbage wrote: »

Human Counters have misreadings and could have bias.
OCR software is now common, you count the papers with two different programs and automatically look for bias. The software could be set to a low ambiguity level with any iffy ballots being examined manually.

you would say that, wouldn't you

GLaDOS · 10-02-2020 1:56pm

Minor thing I have a question about.

At the end of each count, I've noticed sometimes one candidate is eliminated and redistributed, other times two are.

What determines if one or two (or more?) are eliminated

ednwireland · 10-02-2020 2:01pm

GLaDOS wrote: »

Minor thing I have a question about.

At the end of each count, I've noticed sometimes one candidate is eliminated and redistributed, other times two are.

What determines if one or two (or more?) are eliminated

if the next person cant overtake the candidate above them with all the transfers from the eliminated candidate they are also eliminated- i think

dulpit · 10-02-2020 2:01pm

GLaDOS wrote: »

Minor thing I have a question about.

At the end of each count, I've noticed sometimes one candidate is eliminated and redistributed, other times two are.

What determines if one or two (or more?) are eliminated

It depends on the number of votes that people have at the bottom. As an example if after the first count nobody has exceeded the quota and the bottom 4 candidates are as follows:

100 votes
90 votes
25 votes
20 votes

If you eliminated just the bottom person, and even if all of their votes went to the 2nd last, that candidate would still be lower than the 3rd last, so they would eliminate both at the same time.

The only time that the above scenario would not involve 2 eliminations is if there is a chance the bottom candidate can reach the threshold to recover their expenses (if you finish on at least a quarter of the quota you can claim up to €8,700 of your expenses).

Hope this makes sense.

seamus · 10-02-2020 2:07pm

GLaDOS wrote: »

Minor thing I have a question about.

At the end of each count, I've noticed sometimes one candidate is eliminated and redistributed, other times two are.

What determines if one or two (or more?) are eliminated

That's up to the returning officer. It's basically to speed up the count. If they feel like eliminating the lowest candidate won't be enough to make any kind of difference to the count, then they'll eliminate the lowest 2 (or 3 or 4).

So if, for example, table looks like this, and the quota is 7,000:

Cand. A - 5,000
Cand. B - 4,300
...
...
Cand. W - 1,000
Cand. X - 500
Cand. Y - 100
Cand. Z - 50

You can see that if you eliminate Candidate Z, it won't change much. Even if all their transfers go to Y, that won't change a thing.

So you may as well eliminate Y too. However, this won't change much either. Nobody will make quota and candidate X won't gain more than W. So you may as well eliminate X too.

Now you've got 650 votes to distribute, and while nobody will make quota, it may cause the placing of candidates to change - Candidate W might move up a slot, candidate B might drop down a slot.

And so on. The ordering obviously is important as it determines who gets eliminated next, and ultimately who gets elected/eliminated at the final count.

GLaDOS · 10-02-2020 2:16pm

Thanks guys, looking at at own constituency so far that makes sense

10-02-2020 5:35pm

In Louth at the minute they're distributing Mark Deary's votes. There are 4 people above him with 3 seats available. If there's a case where one of those 3 goes above the quota will his surplus then have to be distributed or will the top 3 right then be deemed elected?

seamus · 10-02-2020 5:47pm

Deleted User wrote: »

In Louth at the minute they're distributing Mark Deary's votes. There are 4 people above him with 3 seats available. If there's a case where one of those 3 goes above the quota will his surplus then have to be distributed or will the top 3 right then be deemed elected?

The surplus will have to be distributed to determine what order the next 3 take. In that case, there'll be 3 people and two seats.

If the guy in position 2 has a surplus and that surplus could change the order of the rest of the candidates, then it'll be distributed as normal.

Once that's done, the candidate with the lowest votes is eliminated and the other two elected.

Edit: Actually I might be wrong. In Dublin Fingal, there is one seat left and two candidates. On the last count, the candidate exceeded the quota by just 3 votes. It looks like they're going to take those 3 and count them, even though they will make no difference to who gets the last seat.

Geuze · 21-05-2024 10:23pm

This has no doubt been asked already, but here I go again anyways.

You give your first pref to candidate A, who is very popular.

The quota is 9,000, they get 10,000 first prefs, and are duly elected on the first count.

The surplus of 1,000 votes is to be transferred.

How are the 1,000 distributed?

I read earlier that it is not the last/final 1,000 votes, but that instead all the second prefs are distributed proportionately.

Can somebody explain carefully?

Thanks.

Badly Drunk Boy · 22-05-2024 11:57am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122167519#Comment_122167519

This was the only part that I wasn't sure 100% about, but what I assumed was happening turns out to be right.

From citizensinformation.ie https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/government-in-ireland/elections-and-referenda/voting/proportional-representation/#21d48d

What happens to surplus votes?

If a candidate receives more than the quota, their surplus ballot papers are transferred to the remaining candidates.

The surplus is transferred in proportion to how many second (or lower) preferences the other candidates received in the elected candidate’s vote. If the second preference candidate on any ballot is either already elected or has been eliminated, then the third preference is used, and so on.

If a candidate is elected at the first count, then all their votes are used to calculate the proportion of surplus that will be given to each candidate.

For example:

Candidate A receives 6,000 first preference votes at the first count. The quota is 5,000. A is elected with a surplus of 1,000 votes.

Out of A’s 6,000 total votes, 30% gave their second preference to B, and 20% gave their second preference to C.

B receives 300 votes (30% of 1,000) and C receives 200 votes (20% of 1,000)

Where a candidate reaches the quota after the first count, only the ballot papers that brought them over the quota are examined (the votes that were transferred from the previous count).

If 2 or more candidates are elected at the same time, then the surplus of the candidate with the largest vote is distributed first.

Geuze · 22-05-2024 1:56pm

Okay, thanks.

I have another question.

This time you give your first pref to a middling candidate, person A, who is eliminated in the fourth count.

Your second pref B and your third pref C have already been elected, in earlier counts.

That means that when the votes of the eliminated candidate A are transferred, your vote is not used again?

interlocked · 22-05-2024 4:56pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122169616#Comment_122169616

If you have no further preferences on your ballot paper, then it obviously becomes non transferrable. If, however, you have marked a preference for each candidate on the paper, for example, then your vote will be transferred to your highest remaining preference. I've seen votes with 11th or 12th preferences, for example, still being transferred.

That's why your vote can be used not only to elect your own preferred candidate, but also to reject your least favourite, by giving them your last preference.

Does this make sense?

Brussels Sprout · 06-06-2024 12:00pm

Given that it's election day tomorrow it's worth bumping this.

PRSTV - Our voting system explained

Comments

What happens to surplus votes?