<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>euyyn</author><text>In Spain many are proposing to get rid of districts altogether, because they severely penalize parties that aren&amp;#x27;t the two biggest (except regionalistic parties). And this is in a country where the system actually allows third parties to get seats in Congress (even if harder) - the American system is very very ill of bipartidism. Congress should be 1 person 1 vote, no matter your political preference or where you live.</text><parent_chain><item><author>tunesmith</author><text>The thought experiment I&amp;#x27;ve liked in the past is...&lt;p&gt;Say you have a 55&amp;#x2F;45 state, with 9 congressional districts. Roughly speaking, what is most fair? A 5&amp;#x2F;4 district split? Or, each district being 55-45, i.e. 9&amp;#x2F;0?&lt;p&gt;If I&amp;#x27;m reading it right, it sounds like the efficiency gap would mean that 5&amp;#x2F;4 would be more fair, but that would actually require drawing districts in a way that pays attention to the political and demographic makeup of the geography.&lt;p&gt;I get that for many states, if the Democrats had the 55, then current gerrymandering means that they might only get 2&amp;#x2F;7, or two out of the nine candidates, which seems wildly off no matter how you look at it, but still, I have trouble identifying the principle of what fair actually &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt;. And I don&amp;#x27;t like the answer of just arbitrarily picking a math formula that is used the same way everywhere. Because, in the absence of a principle behind it, it could be just as distorted. For instance, if 5&amp;#x2F;4 is more fair, then a geographically blind districting program could very easily end up with similar blended districts leading to a 9&amp;#x2F;0 state.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Death to the Gerrymander</title><url>http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/death_to_the_gerrymander_paul_smith_might_defeat_unconstitutional_redistricting.html</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>Taek</author><text>Well, ideally everyone is proportionally represented at every level of government. So you&amp;#x27;d want a 5&amp;#x2F;4 split at the top level, where each person has a representative that they like.&lt;p&gt;You&amp;#x27;d almost want gerrymandering, but of a different sort. Traditional gerrymandering makes some districts win by 100&amp;#x2F;0 and the rest lose 49&amp;#x2F;51 to marginalize as many people as possible.&lt;p&gt;But perhaps more fair would be perfect gerrymandering - every district ends up with a 100&amp;#x2F;0 split. This means you get 5&amp;#x2F;4 at the top level, while every citizen is represented by someone they voted for.&lt;p&gt;Districts end up as more of an overlapping blur.</text><parent_chain><item><author>tunesmith</author><text>The thought experiment I&amp;#x27;ve liked in the past is...&lt;p&gt;Say you have a 55&amp;#x2F;45 state, with 9 congressional districts. Roughly speaking, what is most fair? A 5&amp;#x2F;4 district split? Or, each district being 55-45, i.e. 9&amp;#x2F;0?&lt;p&gt;If I&amp;#x27;m reading it right, it sounds like the efficiency gap would mean that 5&amp;#x2F;4 would be more fair, but that would actually require drawing districts in a way that pays attention to the political and demographic makeup of the geography.&lt;p&gt;I get that for many states, if the Democrats had the 55, then current gerrymandering means that they might only get 2&amp;#x2F;7, or two out of the nine candidates, which seems wildly off no matter how you look at it, but still, I have trouble identifying the principle of what fair actually &lt;i&gt;is&lt;/i&gt;. And I don&amp;#x27;t like the answer of just arbitrarily picking a math formula that is used the same way everywhere. Because, in the absence of a principle behind it, it could be just as distorted. For instance, if 5&amp;#x2F;4 is more fair, then a geographically blind districting program could very easily end up with similar blended districts leading to a 9&amp;#x2F;0 state.</text></item></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Death to the Gerrymander</title><url>http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2017/01/death_to_the_gerrymander_paul_smith_might_defeat_unconstitutional_redistricting.html</url></story>