<transcript><audio_101> % a le droit de négocier avec une liste présente au deuxième tour pour fusionner. Pourquoi à partir de 5 % ? D'une manière générale, le problème est que même si dans ce cas on incite à la négociation et au compromis, ces négociations peuvent se faire dans des accords secrets, sans aucune</transcript><transcript><audio_102> et donc il n'y a aucune garantie que ce compromis convienne aux votants. Au moins, si tout le monde était désigné à la proportionnelle, les négociations pour obtenir une majorité se feraient en partie publiquement, dans l'Assemblée, et surtout entre des gens dont le</transcript><transcript><audio_103> Le vote alternatif est la méthode de Coombs. Le vote alternatif s'appelle aussi le</transcript><caption><image_104>The image is a screenshot of a game interface with a dark background and a full moon in the top right corner. In the center of the image, there is a table with six columns and six rows. The columns are labeled "Option A", "Option B", and "Option C". The rows are arranged in a grid-like pattern. 

At the top of the table, there are two buttons - "VOTE alternatif" and "four 1". Below the buttons, it says "Option 1" in French. The first button is "Option 2" and the second button is labeled "option 3". The third button is labelled "Option 4". The fourth button is titled "Option 5". The fifth button is numbered "Option 6". The sixth button is marked "Option 7". The seventh button is highlighted in yellow.

The background of the screen is black, and the text is white. The overall design of the interface is simple and minimalistic.</caption><transcript><audio_105> ou méthode de R. Ce système est très proche d'une autre méthode qu'on appelle la méthode de Kumbhs. Dans les deux cas, chaque votant classe toutes les options ou une partie des options par ordre de préférence. Lors du dépouillement, on compte d'abord les voix des options qui ont été</transcript><transcript><audio_106> Si une option obtient la majorité absolue des voix, elle est retenue. Sinon, on supprime l'option la moins soutenue et on la barre dans tous les bulletins des votants, ce qui modifie le rang des options placées après elle. De nouveau, on compte les voix des options premières de liste et on poursuit le</transcript> list which has made at least 5% has the right to negotiate with a list present in the second round to merge why from 5% generally speaking the problem is that even if in this case we encourage negotiation and compromise these negotiations can be done in secret agreements without any public discussion and therefore there is no guarantee that this compromise will suit the voters at least if everyone were designated proportionally, the negotiations to obtain a majority would be partly done publicly in the assembly and especially between people whose weight in the negotiation really corresponds to their weight in the population, well now that we  took a look at the best-known and most used ways of voting we will see that there are many other ways of doing alternative voting and the kums method alternative voting is also called transferable preferential voting or m methods this system is very close to another method that we  calls the kums method in both cases each voter classifies all the options or part of the options in order of preference during the counting we first count the votes of the options which were classified first if an option obtains the absolute majority of the votes  voice it is retained otherwise we delete  the least supported option and we cross it out in all the voters' ballots which modifies the rank of the options placed and after it again we count the votes of the options first on the list and we continue the
{"source": "grass-yt-cc-by.03NtiW-NXcI|shard_10044_53|create_multimodal_data.extract_yt_and_generate_transcripts.54|shard_10044|create_multimodal_data.generate_captions.54|shard_10044|create_multimodal_data.generate_captions.54", "params": {"id": "03NtiW-NXcI", "channel_id": "UC0yPCUmdMZIGtnxSnx5_ifA", "duration": 3128, "view_count": 40972, "age_limit": 0, "chapters": [{"start_time": 0.0, "title": "Introduction", "end_time": 46.0}, {"start_time": 46.0, "title": "Comment d\u00e9cider \u00e0 plusieurs", "end_time": 153.0}, {"start_time": 153.0, "title": "D'autres \u00ab \u00e9vidences \u00bb", "end_time": 363.0}, {"start_time": 363.0, "title": "Consensus", "end_time": 538.0}, {"start_time": 538.0, "title": "M\u00e9thodes de d\u00e9cision", "end_time": 649.0}, {"start_time": 649.0, "title": "1 Tirage au sort", "end_time": 756.0}, {"start_time": 756.0, "title": "2 Vote \u00e0 la proportionnelle", "end_time": 937.0}, {"start_time": 937.0, "title": "3 Vote \u00e0 la majorit\u00e9 relative", "end_time": 987.0}, {"start_time": 987.0, "title": "4 Vote \u00e0 la majorit\u00e9 absolue", "end_time": 1244.0}, {"start_time": 1244.0, "title": "5 Vote alternatif et m\u00e9thode de Coombs", "end_time": 1450.0}, {"start_time": 1450.0, "title": "6 M\u00e9thode Condorcet", "end_time": 1581.0}, {"start_time": 1581.0, "title": "7 Vote par approbation", "end_time": 1698.0}, {"start_time": 1698.0, "title": "8 M\u00e9thode Borda", "end_time": 1849.0}, {"start_time": 1849.0, "title": "9 Vote cumulatif", "end_time": 1904.0}, {"start_time": 1904.0, "title": "Options suppl\u00e9mentaires", "end_time": 2097.0}, {"start_time": 2097.0, "title": "Ma pr\u00e9f\u00e9rence", "end_time": 2278.0}, {"start_time": 2278.0, "title": "Jugement majoritaire", "end_time": 2634.0}, {"start_time": 2634.0, "title": "Ma d\u00e9mocratie", "end_time": 2980.0}, {"start_time": 2980.0, "title": "Pr\u00e9sentation du fichier Excel", "end_time": 3065.0}, {"start_time": 3065.0, "title": "Pr\u00e9sentation du site Borda", "end_time": 3090.0}, {"start_time": 3090.0, "title": "Conclusion", "end_time": 3128}], "like_count": 2261, "channel_follower_count": 51700, "license": "Creative Commons Attribution license (reuse allowed)", "uploader_id": "@EspritCritique", "yt_tar_file": "/leonardo_work/EUHPC_E03_068/audio/fixed_download/grass-yt-cc-by//shard_10044/03NtiW-NXcI.tar.gz"}}