h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: STV - the Single Transferable Vote - A87709666
Author: Nosebagbadger {Ace} - U14077177

This entry went through Peer Review, was picked and sub-edited, but the Guide Editors weren't happy with it, so it's been withdrawn from the publishing process and we've put it into Peer Review again. Hopefully, second time round we'll be able to sort out the problems.

As we see it, the main problems are in the "The Election is Here" section.

- Giving the names of actual h2g2 Researchers in this section confuses things. You could have the five going up for election as Angus Ambleton, Bernard Biggs and other alphabetically sorted names. Keeping the genders the same would make this change relatively easy.

- The system of keeping track of votes using A, B, C etc is confusing.

- It's not adequately explained why you don't have to go beyond the first two choices in each vote.

- What you really need to mention in the introductory paragraph is that STV means voting 1, 2, 3, and so on, in order of your preference. Leave any mention of FPP until later in the Entry, and then make the comparison by all means.

- "The STV system moves votes from their original candidates" - This makes it sound like there's ballot-rigging going on. It would work much more clearly if you used the phrase "first preference candidates", but that relies on changing the introduction as above.

- I'd be inclined to leave out the bit about the rain on Thursdays and so on. It seems a bit like trying too hard to be funny, and gets in the way of clarity for someone who doesn't understand STV, but wants to.

I made some suggestions about how to improve the keeping track of votes in the other Peer Review thread just before the Entry was selected, so I'll copy them here for completeness, in case the suggestions are useful:

"I think it would be helpful if you stated after the heading "The Election is Here!" that you have 5 candidates competing for 3 positions and 27 people voting, and maybe even calculate the Droop Quota as well, to set the scene before you draw the table.

I presume "Groups" A, B, C etc just mean the voters who voted for a particular combination of candidates as 1st and 2nd choices, so you could draw your first table as:

Group | 1st Choice | 2nd Choice | Number voting for these choices
A | Taff | Aunt Lil | 5

etc

I like your bullet points - they could perhaps come next after the table.

You could perhaps set your second table out more clearly by writing Taff - 8 votes (5A, 3B), or something similar (all those repeated letters didn't display very well on my computer...). Alternatively, it might work better in words: -

3rd round
Aunt Lil - eliminated
Taff - 8 votes (5 from A, 3 from B)

etc, I don't know.

I'm intrigued why only the first two choices for each voter are all that is needed - is it because there are 5 candidates and 3 places, so 2 rounds are needed to eliminate 2 people?"

I would suggest Ireland, not Éire. You're writing in English, not in Irish.

This is an important entry which should get into the Guide.

TRiG.

Just adding myself, since, as it was put back into PR by the eds, I've not been attached to the entry conversation

Will try and deal with comments in a week or so, once i get some time

Please keep adding/summarising points

Original article: A4199141
Previous article: A58593180
Peer Review 1: F15082217?thread=7023175
Peer Review 2: F15082217?thread=8233965

So, how is this one coming along?

<BB<

I was just thinking about this one - I might remove it back to my PS since i vaguely remember that it failed after being picked for various reasons

I think it's come on too far to just be abandoned - it was accepted initially after all before returned to Peer Review.

Up above they've said 'the main problems are in the "The Election is Here" section', so let's see if we can improve that bit.
The first point raised to address is 'Giving the names of actual h2g2 Researchers in this section confuses things'
That's easy to sort out. You could use alphabetically sorted names like Aunty Ann, Big Ben, Captain Charles and Dancing Donna - probably a good idea to avoid using real names and famous fictional ones too.
As the editors said 'Keeping the genders the same would make this change relatively easy'.

The next point was 'The system of keeping track of votes using A, B, C etc is confusing'
sashaQ has made a good suggestion about this

This entry very almost made it, so it would be tragic for it to stall and be abandoned now!

<BB<

This is an important subject, and it should get into the guide. However, the structure could be improved a little. KB earlier suggested taking any mention of FPTP out of the lede. I think he's right.

And there's a few other little things:
Voting in an STV system requires all the standard things that you need to be eligible to vote normally [FOOTNOTE: For example, in an FPP election.].
What makes FPTP more "normal" than STV? That depends on your perspective. From my perspective, STV is normal. I know Peer Review is not a sausage factory, and your personal voice should remain in the entry, but that sort of thing could alienate some readers.

Also, the heading "When Does it Stop?" was a little odd. When does what stop?

TRiG.

I believe First Past the Post is much more common than Single Transferable Vote in the world, so that would make it "normal".

Sorry, I will remember and correct this entry

Concerning the latter two points, when I fix this I'll put more common, rather than normal - I would say that it is more common makes it "normal", but I think it does influence the term

Hi, sorry for being so late, I didn't even realise this was still in PR.

I have some questions:
What is FPP? How does it work? You give it as example but never explain.

In the section 'Election is here!' I don't understand the tables. What are all these letters, like 'AAAAA'? What does it mean?
... ok, it seems they are some 'groups' but which groups? Sorry, I don't get it at all. Is that social groups? But why does it matter which group votes for a candidate?

I'm afraid I don't really understand this Entry.

FPP means First Past the Post - each voter casts one vote, for one candidate. The candidate with the most votes wins. It's certainly worth explaining briefly in the entry.

Yes please explain it just in one sentence.

I echo what has been said earlier, this is an important Entry. If it could explain simply how the STV actually works, I am sure it would be really useful.

I've heard lots of explanations over the years, but they go in one ear and out another.

Good luck nbb, think of me when you try to iron out the wrinkles!

We're getting on for nine months since my last posting on this thread and there has been no movement. I think we have to send this Entry back again. Please nominate where to send it.

Thank you

I suggested to move it back to my page last time, but was asked not to - I shall move it back now,

My apologies for not being able to get round to it

Sorry, I thought I had the ability to remove my entries from PR, but it says I can't move the thread

Not sure if this is a recent(ish) change or if I just haven't failed to complete any entry before, so haven't had need to do so

Could a scout(?) or Ed shift it back to my PS, please

Do you see an X beside the entry when you look at the Peer Review list in Brunel?

http://www.h2g2.com/dna/h2g2/brunel/RF1

If you do, click on it. If not, you'll need an Editor to remove the entry from Peer Review.