[EM] ¿Why do some absolutely hate ScoreVoting and insist on Ranked Ballots?
rbj at audioimagination.com
Sat Apr 14 05:41:33 PDT 2012
On 4/14/12 3:42 AM, ⸘Ŭalabio‽ wrote:
>> > but your mapping makes the ranked ballot synonymous with the score ballot. that is my point.
> In all voting systems, one counts votes at some point. ScoreVoting is just more explicit about it.
no, Score voting does *not* count votes. it totals scores or ratings.
Olympic judges are *not* voting for their favorite contestant. they are
scoring or rating them, ostensibly objectively. but we go into the
voting booth as *partisans* and we put *all* of the voting power we have
(that is limited by "One person, one vote") behind the candidates that
represent our political interests.
it's not the same.
>>>>> >>>> The ballot could allow ranking or ratings with equal rankings or ratings allowed. The rankings would then be converted to ratings like thus:
>> > so you're saying that we can have our choice between rating and ranking, as long as we choose rating.
> Frankly, I do not see what the big deal is, given that at some point one must quantify, anyway.
it's called "bait-and-switch", Ŭalabio. you say "here is a method that
should accommodate both you Ranked-Choice advocates and us Score
advocates", but when we buy the product, we find that it is only a Score
in a system that quantifies according to the principle of
One-person-one-vote, it doesn't matter that you like your candidate much
more than i like my candidate. our votes count equally anyway.
the ranked ballot is there *only* to deal with voter contingencies.
unless it's Borda, then the ranked ballot is there to score the
candidates in a crude manner. that's why Borda is a crappy way to
tabulate ranked ballots.
gotta go to New Hampshire (a possible swing state, Vermont is safe) to
campaign for Obama. talk to you guys later.
r b-j rbj at audioimagination.com
"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
More information about the Election-Methods