Template talk:Tenn voting example

Column widths changed

I changed the table so that all of the columns are equal (i.e. width="25%"). IMO the old version, which sized the columns according to the number of voters, was unintuitive; rather than indicate the number of voters visually, it looked like there was some kind of CSS problem. --bdesham ★ 21:40, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Format conflict

The right alignment of the Tennessee map image can conflict with the right alignment of the infobox in Template:Electoral_systems. The image will only be positioned below the infobox. This can result in the image overlaying the table of voter preferences, as on the Approval voting page, or even pushing the image down into another section. Is there a way to fix this conflict other than moving the example further down on the page or removing the right alignment of the image? DCary (talk) 21:56, 9 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Overlap problems

As the template stands now, the image may overlap the table. I tried to fix it by aligning the table with align="left", but then it can get separated from the text. Is there a way to render the table inline in such a way that the image wouldn’t be allowed to overlap it? —Frungi (talk) 04:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image covers text.

In Range voting (archive link [1]), the image of TN is covering some of the text of the template. -- 128.104.112.147 (talk) 17:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes!

By far one of the best explanations ever. 76.117.247.55 (talk) 04:44, 5 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chattanooga

In which system would Chattanooga win? KlokkoVanDenBerg (talk) 21:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

this would be Wikipedia:Original research but I found that for STAR voting, changing the stars voters from each city give to other cities can give a Chattanooga win. Faffed around in excel and put it here https://imgur.com/a/cn2ZMhF
All the modification does is that if Nashville gives Memphis 0 stars, then Memphis would give Nashville 0 stars - its the same distance both ways.
Then again, the scenario was premised on preferences given proportionally, based on relative distance - Nashville is the closest other city to Memphis, but Memphis is not the closest other city to Nashville.

If you seek to ignore that, then the star rankings each city gives each other city CityVoterIsFrom(Memphis,Nashville,Chattanooga,Knoxville) for Chattanooga to win is

Memphis(5,0,0,0)

Nashville(0,5,3,2)

Chattanooga(0,3,5,4)

Knoxville(0,2,4,5)

The original scenario on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/STAR_voting#Example gives

Memphis(5,2,1,0)

Nashville(0,5,2,1)

Chattanooga(0,3,5,3)

Knoxville(0,2,4,5)

that being said, Wikipedia:Original research.

don't recall any voter system giving the template, as it is now, a Chattanooga win Iamthinking2202 (talk) 15:39, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@KlokkoVanDenBerg: I saw in the TedEd video on voting systems that in the Contingent vote and Two-round voting system, Knoxville voters who prefer Chattanooga to Nashville might vote for the former as their first choice, and if at least 14 of the 17 do, this will lead to Chattanooga and Memphis going into the second round and the former becoming the capital. This is a similar strategy to the one mentioned in the STAR voting example, and a similar counter-strategy (not mentioned in the TedEd video) would work, that if Memphis voters predict that Knoxville voters will take this strategy, they might vote Nashville as their first choice. Red Panda 25 23:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]