Right, and for pronouns you don’t just put apostrophe s after. So you don’t make “it” possessive by adding apostrophe s just like you don’t add apostrophe s to “he” or “him” to make it possessive.

If you treat the pronoun “it” like a regular (non-pronoun) noun instead of like other pronouns, that is itself an exception.

As “its” is used to indicate possession by “it”, “its” is an exception to apostrophe-s construction as used to indicate possessive forms.

Most, if not all, pronouns work that way though.

“The man’s arm” becomes “his arm” not “him’s arm”. “The woman’s arm” becomes “her arm” not “her’s arm”. Similarly, “the robot’s arm” becomes “its arm” not “it’s arm”.

I don’t really care if people use “it’s” instead of “its” , but I don’t think it’s a unique exception. The only thing that’s unique is that it is pronounced the same way as if you tacked an apostrophe and an s on the end. If we used the word “hims” instead of “his”, I’m sure people would start putting an apostrophe in there too.

You would rank them once.

If we were taking the top 5 candidates in a FPTP election, once a candidate receives 16.66% of the vote they would be guaranteed to get a seat because it’s impossible for 5 other candidates to also have at least 16.66% of the vote. So the election threshold in this election is 16.66%. In general when selecting n winners, it is 1 / (n+1).

The scoring takes place in rounds and every round either a candidate will earn a seat or a candidate will be removed (votes can be reallocated to them in later rounds so they’re not permanently out).

When a candidate exceeds the election threshold they win a seat and their excess votes are then redistributed to the other candidates. Suppose Rep1 wins the first round by 1 million votes over the election threshold. Their excess votes are redistributed based on what the voters’ next preferred candidate is. E.g. Of the voters who voted for Rep1, 70% had Rep2 as their next choice and 30% had Rep3 as their next choice. So Rep2 earns 700,000 votes and Rep3 earns 300,000 votes. Then the next round of scoring begins.

If no candidate reaches the election threshold that round, the votes from the lowest scoring candidate are eliminated and their votes are redistributed based on the voters’ next choice similar to how the excess votes from a winner are redistributed (except now it’s 100% of their votes). Then onto the next round.

If we assume that everyone votes down party lines, then every time votes are redistributed (whether because a seat was won or because a candidate was eliminated that round) the votes would only be redistributed to someone of their same party. If Democrats have 33% of the vote, then when a Republican wins a seat the excess votes just get redistributed to other Republicans. When a Democrat candidate is removed from a round their votes just go to the next Democrat candidates. The Republicans aren’t taking away any of the Democrats’ slice of the pie. Inside that blue slice there might be several rounds of shuffling votes around until one of them reaches the election threshold but none of the Democrat votes would ever get redistributed to the Republicans.