Talk:Consistency criterion

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

First past the post:

In this article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_system#Criteria in evaluating voting systems, the table says that FPTP is "consistent". This is not true. Else, the definition of consistent is badly written enough not to be understood.

Example:

Votes cast for the same 3 candidates in 2 voting districts.

VOTING DISTRICT A Candidate A: 20 Candidate B: 25 Candidate C: 5

VOTING DISTRICT B Candidate A: 20 Candidate B: 5 Candidate C: 25

Take both voting district totals together, and candidate A wins. Split the voting districts into A and B and candidate A does not win. --jrleighton 04:08, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

A voting system is consistent if, when the electorate is divided arbitrarily into two parts and separate elections in each part result in the same alternative being selected, an election of the entire electorate also selects that alternative.

In your scenario, it is not true that "separate elections in each part result in the same alternative being selected." KVenzke 00:10, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Range voting

So what about range voting or cumulative voting? They seem to satisfy this criterion, but not the definition of positional voting system "A positional voting system is a ranked voting method in which the options receive points based on their position on each ballot, and the option with the most points wins." --Henrygb 10:12, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

They're not preferential voting systems. CRGreathouse (t | c) 02:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)