|
|
Post by Pete Whitehead on Aug 17, 2014 9:20:39 GMT
You can be bothered to make "Borders" distinguishable from "Dumfries", you can go to the effort to make "Dumfries" distinguishable from "Ayr". I can't because Dumfriesshire is in the same constituency as Ayrshire |
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944 
|
Post by johnr on Aug 17, 2014 12:52:15 GMT
A mixed-member system with constituency and regional MPs. You can have your FPTP/AV/Duck race for the 'local member', but national/regional/LA/county vote share taken into account via closed/open list. AV+ as per Jenkins Commission. |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Aug 17, 2014 14:42:29 GMT
For the same size multi-seat constituencies, d'Hondt would tend to favour bigger parties over smaller ones, relative to STV.
Example, party A gets 1.7 STV quotas of first-preference votes, party B gets 0.8 quotas. Under d'Hondt party A is entitled to a second seat before party B. Under STV, party B would be more likely, after transfers, to reach 1 quota before party A reached 2.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2014 8:36:55 GMT
A mixed-member system with constituency and regional MPs. You can have your FPTP/AV/Duck race for the 'local member', but national/regional/LA/county vote share taken into account via closed/open list. AV+ as per Jenkins Commission. About which the Internet has not completely forgotten (pdf link - www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/RP98-112.pdf ) |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 19, 2014 10:58:35 GMT
Probably needs renaming AMS+ or anything that gets rid of the AV part.. |
|
johnr
Labour & Co-operative
Posts: 1,944
|
Post by johnr on Aug 19, 2014 18:09:55 GMT
Probably needs renaming AMS+ or anything that gets rid of the AV part.. Well, thats more of a marketing problem.... I know of several senior Labour people who would still want this - Alan Johnson for one. |
|
|
|
Post by hullenedge on Aug 23, 2014 9:35:26 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by greenchristian on Aug 25, 2014 13:33:57 GMT
How the fuck have you deduced that Dumfries and Shetland are in the same constituency? Are you colour blind? I am 45 years old and, like 90% of the population, do not have the vision of a 18-year-old web designer with a 95-inch monitor with perfect colour balance, who thinks that yellowy-green is distinguishable from greeny-yellow. If you use colours to transfer meaning you ensure that those colours are distinct from each other, and if the range of colours has a meaning, you ensure the colour range ranges through self-similar colours. Edit: I've just checked with a colour picker, and one of them is 255,255,0 and another is 0,255,0, which with the combination of my monitor and my eyes is indistinguishable. You can be bothered to make "Borders" distinguishable from "Dumfries", you can go to the effort to make "Dumfries" distinguishable from "Ayr". 255,255,0 is pure yellow, 0,255,0 is pure green. Either your monitor needs adjusting/replacing, or you have some form of colour blindness. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2014 14:16:15 GMT
How the fuck have you deduced that Dumfries and Shetland are in the same constituency? Are you colour blind? I am 45 years old and, like 90% of the population, do not have the vision of a 18-year-old web designer with a 95-inch monitor with perfect colour balance, who thinks that yellowy-green is distinguishable from greeny-yellow. If you use colours to transfer meaning you ensure that those colours are distinct from each other, and if the range of colours has a meaning, you ensure the colour range ranges through self-similar colours. Edit: I've just checked with a colour picker, and one of them is 255,255,0 and another is 0,255,0, which with the combination of my monitor and my eyes is indistinguishable. You can be bothered to make "Borders" distinguishable from "Dumfries", you can go to the effort to make "Dumfries" distinguishable from "Ayr". |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 25, 2014 20:19:49 GMT
How the fuck have you deduced that Dumfries and Shetland are in the same constituency? Are you colour blind? I am 45 years old and, like 90% of the population, do not have the vision of a 18-year-old web designer with a 95-inch monitor with perfect colour balance, who thinks that yellowy-green is distinguishable from greeny-yellow. If you use colours to transfer meaning you ensure that those colours are distinct from each other, and if the range of colours has a meaning, you ensure the colour range ranges through self-similar colours. Edit: I've just checked with a colour picker, and one of them is 255,255,0 and another is 0,255,0, which with the combination of my monitor and my eyes is indistinguishable. You can be bothered to make "Borders" distinguishable from "Dumfries", you can go to the effort to make "Dumfries" distinguishable from "Ayr". I am a 71 year old with weak eyesight and eye problems and poor IT skill and an old laptop. I am an artist and to me those colours are very clearly yellow and green and quite distinct. It must be your laptop. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,804
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 25, 2014 21:39:57 GMT
I am a 71 year old with weak eyesight and eye problems and poor IT skill and an old laptop. I am an artist and to me those colours are very clearly yellow and green and quite distinct. It must be your laptop. I haven't got a laptop. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 25, 2014 21:56:41 GMT
I am a 71 year old with weak eyesight and eye problems and poor IT skill and an old laptop. I am an artist and to me those colours are very clearly yellow and green and quite distinct. It must be your laptop. I haven't got a laptop. That is a silly quibble. Whatever you are using has a fault or needs a systems tweak or you need that eye test. |
|
J.G.Harston
Lib Dem
Leave-voting Brexit-supporting Liberal Democrat
Posts: 14,804
|
Post by J.G.Harston on Aug 26, 2014 0:24:42 GMT
That is a silly quibble. Whatever you are using has a fault or needs a systems tweak or you need that eye test. But that's the whole point. It seems like eternal September when discussing this. When designing something where you do not have control over the final production media, you design on the assumption that that final production media is not 100% perfect. If you are printing a full-colour paper magazine, yes, *you* know how the colour balance and contrast comes out as *you* control the physical media of the final product. When producing something electronically you have absolutely utterly ZERO control over the final production media, hundreds of thousands of *OTHER* *PEOPLE*'s monitors and their eyeballs. So, if you are using colours to convey information rather than just throw-away background fluff, you design for high contrast colours. Saturated green and saturated yellow are notorious for being colours that are the first to drift towards each other on monitors, in addition to their ideal reproduction contrast being too low. Similarly monstrocities I've seen have included, white on yellow, black on red, purple on black, reddy-brown on browny-red, pale blue and cyan. |
|
|
|
Post by carlton43 on Aug 26, 2014 0:55:28 GMT
That is a silly quibble. Whatever you are using has a fault or needs a systems tweak or you need that eye test. But that's the whole point. It seems like eternal September when discussing this. When designing something where you do not have control over the final production media, you design on the assumption that that final production media is not 100% perfect. If you are printing a full-colour paper magazine, yes, *you* know how the colour balance and contrast comes out as *you* control the physical media of the final product. When producing something electronically you have absolutely utterly ZERO control over the final production media, hundreds of thousands of *OTHER* *PEOPLE*'s monitors and their eyeballs. So, if you are using colours to convey information rather than just throw-away background fluff, you design for high contrast colours. Saturated green and saturated yellow are notorious for being colours that are the first to drift towards each other on monitors, in addition to their ideal reproduction contrast being too low. Similarly monstrocities I've seen have included, white on yellow, black on red, purple on black, reddy-brown on browny-red, pale blue and cyan. So why is it only you? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 26, 2014 8:29:23 GMT
I think we're using quite too harsh a tone on JG here, chaps.
|
|
|
|
Post by johnloony on Aug 26, 2014 15:28:48 GMT
When designing something where you do not have control over the final production media, you design on the assumption that that final production media is not 100% perfect. If you are printing a full-colour paper magazine, yes, *you* know how the colour balance and contrast comes out as *you* control the physical media of the final product. When producing something electronically you have absolutely utterly ZERO control over the final production media, hundreds of thousands of *OTHER* *PEOPLE*'s monitors and their eyeballs. So, if you are using colours to convey information rather than just throw-away background fluff, you design for high contrast colours. Saturated green and saturated yellow are notorious for being colours that are the first to drift towards each other on monitors, in addition to their ideal reproduction contrast being too low. Similarly monstrocities I've seen have included, white on yellow, black on red, purple on black, reddy-brown on browny-red, pale blue and cyan. You seem to be missing the point. None of the rest of us have had the slightest difficulty in discerning the difference between yellow and green on the map which was shown earlier on the thread. If you have difficulty in telling them apart on your computer screen (whether it's a monitor or a laptop or whatever), then it must mean that the way your screen shows the colours is very significantly different from how most computer screens normally show colours. Therefore there must be a very significant fault which is way outside the normal range of variation in how colours appear on such things. As I pointed out earlier, if yellow and green appear to be the same colour on your screen, then it would show a continuous yellow/green stripe right across England going from Cheshire to Lincolnshire. This fact alone should have been enough of a clue to indicate that they are supposed to be different colours, which would have given you a clue that the Dumfries area and the Highlands & Islands area were two different areas. |
|
|
|
Post by jonarny on Nov 27, 2014 0:13:20 GMT
This was a good thread, so I'd like to resurrect it. Not the discussion about green, yellow, yellowy-green and greeny-yellow but the d'Hondt stuff.
I have always favoured AV+, but this d'Hondt idea has often come to mind because it seems to be the simplest form of PR which retains a constituency link. No juggling quotas, dilemmas over candidate numbers or week-long counts as with STV.
Often our current constituencies have little in common: a ward may be a couple of local communities, but a constituency is too big to think of as a small number of local communities joined together. On the other hand, people are likely to feel some affinity to their city/county. Leeds, as the OP suggested, is a good example.
I think Pete Whitehead would need to relax the 5 to 10 seat criterion. He touched on Northumberland, which would be a perfectly viable 4-seat constituency in its own right, and suggested combining it with Newcastle. Combining a city with a large rural area is rarely a good idea. Having constituencies with 4-10 or even 3-10 seats [as we have at the moment in the EU elections] would make the drawing of maps much easier.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 30, 2014 11:35:32 GMT
This was a good thread, so I'd like to resurrect it. Not the discussion about green, yellow, yellowy-green and greeny-yellow but the d'Hondt stuff. I have always favoured AV+, but this d'Hondt idea has often come to mind because it seems to be the simplest form of PR which retains a constituency link. No juggling quotas, dilemmas over candidate numbers or week-long counts as with STV. Often our current constituencies have little in common: a ward may be a couple of local communities, but a constituency is too big to think of as a small number of local communities joined together. On the other hand, people are likely to feel some affinity to their city/county. Leeds, as the OP suggested, is a good example. I think Pete Whitehead would need to relax the 5 to 10 seat criterion. He touched on Northumberland, which would be a perfectly viable 4-seat constituency in its own right, and suggested combining it with Newcastle. Combining a city with a large rural area is rarely a good idea. Having constituencies with 4-10 or even 3-10 seats [as we have at the moment in the EU elections] would make the drawing of maps much easier. I favour (open-list) D'Hondt for UK general elections and you make a good case for it. One way of getting round the 5 to 10 seat criterion, to some extent, would be to simply reduce the number of MPs. Do we really need 650 of them? |
|
|
|
Post by No Offence Alan on Nov 30, 2014 11:40:37 GMT
This was a good thread, so I'd like to resurrect it. Not the discussion about green, yellow, yellowy-green and greeny-yellow but the d'Hondt stuff. I have always favoured AV+, but this d'Hondt idea has often come to mind because it seems to be the simplest form of PR which retains a constituency link. No juggling quotas, dilemmas over candidate numbers or week-long counts as with STV. Often our current constituencies have little in common: a ward may be a couple of local communities, but a constituency is too big to think of as a small number of local communities joined together. On the other hand, people are likely to feel some affinity to their city/county. Leeds, as the OP suggested, is a good example. I think Pete Whitehead would need to relax the 5 to 10 seat criterion. He touched on Northumberland, which would be a perfectly viable 4-seat constituency in its own right, and suggested combining it with Newcastle. Combining a city with a large rural area is rarely a good idea. Having constituencies with 4-10 or even 3-10 seats [as we have at the moment in the EU elections] would make the drawing of maps much easier. I favour (open-list) D'Hondt for UK general elections and you make a good case for it. One way of getting round the 5 to 10 seat criterion, to some extent, would be to simply reduce the number of MPs. Do we really need 650 of them? If you want there to be a significant "backbench" contingent of MPs who are not on, or aspiring to be on, the government payroll vote, then Yes. |
|
|
|
Post by Arthur Figgis on Nov 30, 2014 15:25:32 GMT
I favour (open-list) D'Hondt for UK general elections and you make a good case for it. One way of getting round the 5 to 10 seat criterion, to some extent, would be to simply reduce the number of MPs. Do we really need 650 of them? If you want there to be a significant "backbench" contingent of MPs who are not on, or aspiring to be on, the government payroll vote, then Yes. One of the reasons why I support having about 2,000 MPs. All elected by FPTP in small single member constituencies. |
|
