[EM] Suggested name for Range Voting: Free Voting
Abd ul-Rahman Lomax
abd at lomaxdesign.com
Sat Jun 17 09:15:24 PDT 2006
At 12:21 AM 6/17/2006, Jonathan Lundell wrote:
I'm making an exception to my general avoidance of posting here. Yes,
Free Range Voting is a nice name. The "Free" in it refers to a voter
being allowed a broad range of rating levels rather than the black
and white of plurality or approval, or the similarly limited choice
of ranked methods (which are black and white with respect to every
However, to be truly free, voting must not restrict the voter to
personal participation. That is a cost, and quite a significant one.
At common law, any right that can be personally exercised may also be
exercised through an attorney-in-fact, also known as a proxy.
Voters should be free to choose whether or not to vote personally or
through a proxy. Warren's Asset Voting is one scheme that allows
this. (Indeed, it is much more free than most think of it, because
they don't realize that voters could vote for *anyone* or even for
themselves, if they want to personally participate in the next stage
of the election. In other words, it is *not* necessary to choose a
candidate, per se, which is one objection that has been raised. A
false objection, in my opinion, based on a failure to realize that,
generally, if one would trust a candidate with the nuclear button,
for example, one should rationally trust the same person to make an
acceptable choice in whom to so trust. If a President can't be
trusted to delegate authority, that President will be a terrible
president. But it is also false in that such a choice need not be made.
Proxy voting can be combined with any other voting method. If it were
combined with Range, Free Range would truly have earned every aspect
of its name.
More information about the Election-Methods