Owen Edwards
Puisne Justice
Posts: 1,400
Talossan Since: 12-8-2007
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 15, 2013 4:15:37 GMT -6
"The Secretary of State shall employ whatever mathematical formulae and calculations in the apportionment of seats, as will best reflect the intentions of this Act"
46% != 102 seats, and the intention of the Amended Article does not seem to me to favour giving all disputed seats to the largest party...
|
|
|
Post by Ián B. Anglatzarâ on Apr 15, 2013 5:38:33 GMT -6
"Based on the final vote tally, the Secretary of State shall calculate the apportionment of seats among the parties. Each party shall receive a percentage of the seats as equal as possible to its percentage of the popular vote. Each party shall receive a whole number of seats in the final tally. In the event of a single seat being divided among two or more parties mathematically, the party with the highest number of total votes will be used, and in case of a tie, percentile dice will be used to determine a single owner for the divided seat, with chances proportional to the percentage of the vote received. The Secretary of State shall employ whatever mathematical formulae and calculations in the apportionment of seats, as will best reflect the intentions of this Act. The Uppermost Cort shall be the final judge in case of mathematical disputes." I think the first part suggests that the LPR should get it. Except that if you look at the legislative history, the first part of the section is basically original, while the part about the "highest total number of votes" with percentile dice only being used in the event of a tie was added by amendment later. A law should not be interpreted so that the original language overrides later-added amending language. Rather, priority is given to the more recent language. The way I interpret the law it says: 1. Each party shall receive a percentage of the seats as equal as possible to its percentage of the popular vote. 2. If two or more parties are equally close to a whole seat, the party with the highest number of total votes will get it. 3. If there is a tie (because two or more parties are equally close to a whole seat AND have the same number of total votes), percentile dice will be used. Which means that LPR will get the odd seat.
|
|
Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă
Puisne (Associate) Justice of the Uppermost Court
Fraichetz dels punts, es non dels mürs
Posts: 4,063
Talossan Since: 9-23-2012
|
Post by Dr. Txec dal Nordselvă on Apr 15, 2013 7:53:03 GMT -6
Owen, RUMP got 49% not 46%.
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 8:27:13 GMT -6
Hi,
It's clear that CSSP have no right to 22 seats... They only got 20,97% seats already round up to 21...
Party who was round down should get a chance to this seat.
LPR, RUMP ZRT or NPW
Now we can give it to the party the closest or apply the percent dice and this is the part I'm not sur off... But one thing is sure CSPP cannot have this seat...
Mximo
|
|
Vit Caçeir
"I hated being AG so much I fled as far from it as literally possible."
Posts: 810
Talossan Since: 11-19-2007
|
Post by Vit Caçeir on Apr 15, 2013 10:26:59 GMT -6
It's clear that CSSP have no right to 22 seats... Results of the elections to the Cosa: The Rexhalistaes Unificheschti pr'iensa Monarc'hà Panincestind (RUMP) received 61 votes, 49.19% of the total: 98. The Zefençadéirs del Republicánismeu Talossán (ZRT) received 18 votes, 14.52% of the total: 29. The Common Sense Progressive Party (CSPP) received 13 votes, 10.48% of the total: 21. The Moderate Radical Party of Talossa (MRPT) received 13 votes, 10.48% of the total: 21. The Independents's Party (IND) received 8 votes, 10.48% of the total: 13. The New Peculiar Way (NPW) received 7 votes, 5.65% of the total: 11. Le Parti Republicain (LPR) received 4 votes, 3.23% of the total: 7*. They only got 20,97% seats already round up to 21... The Common Sense Progressive Party (CSPP) received 13 votes, 10.48% of the total: 21. It's clear that CSSP have no right to 22 seats... But one thing is sure CSPP cannot have this seat... ?
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 10:50:07 GMT -6
Simple 10,48% of the vote means 20.97 seats... Rounding up to 21... But far away of 22...
Mximo
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 10:53:04 GMT -6
Lpr 6.45 rounding down to 6... Rump 98.39 rounding down to 98 Npw 11.29 rounding down to 11 Zrt 29.03 rounding down to 29
Mximo
|
|
Vit Caçeir
"I hated being AG so much I fled as far from it as literally possible."
Posts: 810
Talossan Since: 11-19-2007
|
Post by Vit Caçeir on Apr 15, 2013 10:54:38 GMT -6
*Response delivered with the most exasperated of sighs* The Common Sense Progressive Party (CSPP) received 13 votes, 10.48% of the total: 21.
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 10:55:21 GMT -6
Oops. Looking back, I think that's actually what should have happened. It appears I just looked at the numbers after the decimal point. I guess it does go to LPR. This is from official of the SoS office Mximo
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 10:59:24 GMT -6
Well i see now they change the original message... To fix it.
When this discussion start it s was not fix.
Mximo
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 11:03:33 GMT -6
Because of ian ... Message i read the discussion and forget to look back...
Sorry about that
Mximo
|
|
Owen Edwards
Puisne Justice
Posts: 1,400
Talossan Since: 12-8-2007
|
Post by Owen Edwards on Apr 15, 2013 11:09:34 GMT -6
GIVE ME MY SEAT BACK MAX
I'M COMING TO QUEBEC
OWEN GONNA GETCHA
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 15, 2013 11:17:17 GMT -6
Funny, just the other day I had a band of rogue Canadians steal the chairs off of my porch...
They are a daring bunch
|
|
|
Post by Colonel Mximo Carbonèl on Apr 15, 2013 11:27:00 GMT -6
Lol... they only steal the chairs? Why??? Mximo
|
|
Vit Caçeir
"I hated being AG so much I fled as far from it as literally possible."
Posts: 810
Talossan Since: 11-19-2007
|
Post by Vit Caçeir on Apr 15, 2013 11:29:10 GMT -6
Not just chairs; a bunch of Nova Scotian separatists just appropriated my ottoman at gunpoint.
Methinks they're planning something.
|
|