[Lnc-business] Delegate Allocations

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Thank you, I will take a look at that.  I want to be sure the spreadsheet
formulas are exactly right since I intend for that spreadsheet to be passed
along to be used in the future to cut down  on reinventions of the wheel
and ensure greater accuracy.

With the regional charts, I intend upon having multiple check sum
calculations to avoid that "on the cusp" issue as I saw that risk which is
part of the reason I decided to handle that tabulation separately.

I truly appreciate your giving it a look-see.

The report is also on LPedia at this point:
https://lpedia.org/Document:National_Convention_2020_Notification_of_Delegate_Alllocations

As that all had to be manually typed and eyes cross very easily, I do
solicit a few eagle-eyed proof-readers to double-check that I transcribed
correctly.  I would be shocked if I didn't transpose a few.

*In Liberty,*

* Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
(part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *



On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 5:20 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> Looking at the delegate allocations:
>
> 1) There appears to be a spreadsheet formula error in the New Hampshire
> row, in the "Delegate Allocation % of Members" column.  It ought to be
> 1.178%, but it is showing 1.200%.  I took a look at your source file, and
> the other formulas in the column multiply by 100 before rounding to 3
> digits, but that row rounds to three digits before multiplying by 100,
> which is why the precision was lost on that row.  This didn't impact the
> calculation of their delegate allocation, though, as it wasn't based on
> that column.
>
> 2)  While the ROUNDUP() function is exactly what should be used for
> calculating the "earned delegates" columns (because the bylaws say states
> get credit for "fractions thereof"), the percent-of-total calculations will
> have better cumulative precision by instead using the ROUND() function.
> Unless a division remainder is 0, the ROUNDUP() will always take that final
> decimal place to the next higher number, whereas the ROUND() function will
> statistically take half of them higher and half of them lower.  As the
> results of these roundings are cumulated into a sum, the effect of the
> ROUND() function tends to nearly cancel itself out with more and more
> numbers in the sum, but the ROUNDUP() function will push the sum higher and
> higher as more numbers are added to the sum.
>
> The cumulative effect of the always-round-up approach can be easily
> demonstrated.  For the ROUNDUP() function, the sum of all the affiliate
> percentages plus the percentage in "Other" comes out to be 100.025%, but
> the same sum with the ROUND() function comes out to be 100.001, which is
> much more precise.
>
> The difference doesn't impact the way the delegate allocations were
> calculated, but if the same ROUNDUP() approach were to be used for
> calculating region formation percentages, and a region adds up percentages
> to verify that they hit the 10% target, it is more likely that a region
> very, very close to the 10% threshold could think that they're over when
> they're really slightly under.  It can still happen with ROUND(), but it is
> more likely to happen with ROUNDUP().  The regions will avoid the issue
> completely by just adding the region's sustaining membership counts and
> manually dividing by the total (minus the "other" category), rather than
> adding up percentages which have (of necessity) been rounded.  And again,
> it's only a risk with regions right on the border of 10% (or multiple
> thereof).
>
> -Alicia
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 3:38 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> > Please see attached sent over the weekend to the affiliates.  Regionals,
> > please make sure that your state chairs received.  I am not confident of
> > the freshness of the state chairs emails available.  It has also been
> > posted on the state chairs list.
> >
> > Mr. Hayes, please make available on the convention site.  It will also be
> > available (as well as any subsequent manuals) on lpedia. A Word copy will
> > be deposited in the central records repository developed by Mr. Fishman
> and
> > myself.
> >
> > For future secretaries, I have created a spreadsheet which will
> > auto-calculate these items with several "check sum" backcheck features.
> > You can view that document here:
> >
> >
> >
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1KyisBqMzDFhW-1WzbemyIZRCFwMK-lK7_lHtRGB-hvE
> >
> > I will be spending a good bit of the time between now and convention
> > preparing training materials in the event that there is a new secretary
> > elected next convention.
> >
> > *  In Liberty,*
> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
> > pas) in an actual email, please contact me privately and let me know.  *
> >
>