Simple problem with this system: It is based on the assumption that

Comment on UK Electoral Reform – Alternative Vote System by JimBo.

Simple problem with this system: It is based on the assumption that if there are 6 candidates, the strength of your preference for these candidates decreases (or increases) in a straight line.

Because this is often not true in reality (consider the strength of anti-Tory feeling on parts of this website for example :-), perverse conclusions about who is really liked or disliked the least are possible. There are also other vagaries around what happens if a few candidates are of roughly equal, but slightly different, preference. I would like to go into detail, but will only model an example if required (some illustrative cases exist on the web already).

For the true relative intensity of preference to be ascertained, I suggest that each voter is given a number, say, 100 points. They can allocate any number to a candidate, so long as the total adds up to 100 (this can be mediated by a simple computer at the booth, so voters test their proposed numerical allocations, get them validated on-screen, then print off their ballot).

This can then be aggregated, and either the first past the compiled post wins (on the true non-tactical preference of each voter in each constituency), or any other number of leading preferential candidates selected.

Such a system renders tactical voting truly meaningless. (I regard people who preach tactical voting as being morally equivalent to people who encourage tax evasion.)

If you can’t allocate 100 points across 6 candidates, then… Labour’s “Education-Education-Education” policies have clearly not worked? ! :-)