[EM] Smith sur Vote par approbation

David L Wetzell wetzelld at gmail.com
Wed May 8 12:14:06 PDT 2013


It is clear

1.  the French prefer Approval or Score-Voting over their current 2-stage
ssytem.

2. Full rank ordering sucks.

3. Disinformation and low-info voters about voting alternatives make it
hard to change to IRV, as would likely also be the case if another
alternative had been on the ballot.

4. The relative value among electoral alternatives to FPTP is epistemically
fragile.

dlw


On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 2:02 PM, <
election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com> wrote:

> Send Election-Methods mailing list submissions to
>         election-methods at lists.electorama.com
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         election-methods-request at lists.electorama.com
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         election-methods-owner at lists.electorama.com
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Election-Methods digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Approval Voting (David L Wetzell)
>    2. WHICH VOTING SYSTEM(S) DO REAL VOTERS WANT - FINALLY,     CLEAR
>       EVIDENCE EMERGES! (Warren D Smith)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 14:21:48 -0500
> From: David L Wetzell <wetzelld at gmail.com>
> To: EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>
> Subject: [EM] Approval Voting
> Message-ID:
>         <CAMyHmndPGozxU3JLdo=
> N-5qjzv9e+jpQQmUEdzt3-bUi-Wd7Vw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> In the scenario below.
>
> From: Jonathan Denn <info at aGREATER.US>
>
> In a three way race for POTUS. Let's say we have the traditional D and R. A
> fringe third party candidate runs and is widely hated (H) by everyone
> except his/her supporters. But the final results are
>
> H 34%
> D 33%
> R 33%
>
> Now the hated candidate is leader of the free world.
>
> In Approval Voting, I think it unlikely in this hyper-partisan country that
> many voters will vote for D & R, and not H. So the results might very well
> be the same.
>
> Is this a legit flaw for Approval? It seems quite plausible to me.
>
> dlw:  But if Ds prefer Rs way over Hs and Rs prefer Ds way over Hs then
> both parties could easily adopt a strategy of flipping a coin at the voting
> booth and voting their approval for the other party's candidate over the Hs
> candidate if they get heads.  This would then make the %s,
> H: 34%
> D: 49.5+e%
> R: 49.5+f%
>
> And so there'd be a 50-50 chance that either major-non-extremist party
> would get elected depending on whether e><f.
>
> Now, I believe that the economies of scale in running a big campaign tends
> to make a 3-way competitive election relatively unlikely, which in turn
> tends to make most alternatives to FPTP of close to the same value-added.
>  This is why I believe the focus shd be on changing the mix of
> single-winner and multi-winner/(quasi-)PR elections in such a way that will
> tend to increase the % of competitive seats.  That'll make it so there'd be
> less acrimony, since neither of the (likely two) major parties would be
> able to dominate the other and so it'd be rat'l for them to cooperate to
> maintain their duopolistic positions.
> dlw
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20130507/aedfcc0a/attachment.html
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Tue, 7 May 2013 23:41:30 -0400
> From: Warren D Smith <warren.wds at gmail.com>
> To: election-methods <election-methods at electorama.com>
> Subject: [EM] WHICH VOTING SYSTEM(S) DO REAL VOTERS WANT - FINALLY,
>         CLEAR EVIDENCE EMERGES!
> Message-ID:
>         <
> CAAJP7Y0EUE3x4VfLXPAZAQUx3KO5+EO9wzJ5ar1GJOA-i29MCw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252
>
> Academics just conducted another study in 3 French towns (exit poll)
> of several score voting schemes & approval voting in 2012 presidential
> election.  All produced the same winner as the official winner,
> Hollande.
>
> I'm using the following paper by them (in French):
>    http://RangeVoting.org/France1220.pdf
>
> Anyhow, they appended a QUESTIONNAIRE to the approximately 2340 voters who
> participated in this voting study, getting 80-95% response rates to
> these additional questions.
>
> QUESTION 1 asked which type of voting they prefer. Apparently this
> question was conducted using 4-choice plurality voting (sigh).  1958
> answered.
> The 4 choices were:
> I. Les  deux regles     ("the two rules??" does this mean the present
> 2-round system?
> Or does it mean "I want both approval and score voting"?)  27.53%
>
> II.Vote par approbation  ("approval voting") 29.47%
>
> III.Vote par note ("score voting") 32.84%  WINNER!!
>
> IV.Aucune       des deux ("neither of them")  10.11%
>
> Can any French-speaker explain what the hell that was all about?
> This question wording seems extremely poor.
> Elsewhere in same paper the official system was described as
> "Vote uninominal a deux tours (officiel)."
> Fortunately, we can dodge all that since question 2 works excellently.
>
> QUESTION 2a asked for which kinds of elections approval voting system
> should be used (or not).  4 subquestions:
>
> Elections presidentielles:  61%.
> Elections       legislatives:     57%.
> Elections       municipales:    61%.
> Associations:                  52%.
>
> QUESTION 2b asked for which kinds of elections score voting system
> should be used (or not).  same 4 subquestions:
>
> Elections presidentielles:  62%.
> Elections       legislatives:     55%.
> Elections       municipales:    66%.
> Associations:                  51%.
>
> Superb.  Majority wants them for everything, and 61% is
> equivalent to the largest ever USA presidential "landslides."
> This to me is the first really convincing evidence the populace WANT
> approval and range voting.
>
> Meanwhile there also is convincing poll evidence from UK, Australia,
> and BC Canada
> that voters do NOT want IRV (instant runoff, full rank ordering) if
> choice is between IRV & plain plurality voting.
> AUSTRALIA October 2010 nationwide professional telephone poll (NewsPoll
> http://www.rangevoting.org/AustraliaNewsPollVoteStudy.pdf ) 1202
> random Australian adults: found that they prefer plain-plurality
> voting versus the preferential (instant runoff) system they presently
> use to elect their House. If forced to choose one, they'd choose to
> abandon IRV ? the poll's result was 57% to 37% (with 5% don't
> know/refuse).
> UK: 5 May 2011 binding referendum asking voters to decide whether the
> UK should switch from plurality to IRV voting, resulting in a massive
> landslide victory (68% to 32% of the 19.3 million votes) for "stay
> with plurality."
> British Columbia Canada 12 May 2009:  "switch to IRV" (from plain
> plurality) got only 39.09% of the 1.65 million votes in referendum.
>
> And I just posted landslide poll evidence voters do NOT want "majority
> judgment" with 7-point verbal scale, if choosing between it and
> present 2-round plurality plus 2nd round runoff system:
> FRANCE April 2011:
>    http:/rangevoting.org/Sondageopinionway.pdf
> At the end of this poll of 1000, the pollees were asked WHICH voting method
> they preferred:
> 1. Traditional (plurality plus 2nd round runoff):  63%
> 2. MJ (median-based with verbal 7-point scale):  36%
> 3. Other/don't know:   1%
>
> Now returning to the academic study in the 3 towns, they trialed
> DIFFERENT score voting systems in the 3 towns:
>
> TOWN...........TYPE OF SCORE VOTING TRIALED
> Louvigny...............{-1, 0, +1}
> St.Etienne.............{0, 1, 2}
> Strasbourg............{0, 1, 2, ..., 19, 20}
>
> And the result of question 2b was that there was CLEARLY MORE SUPPORT for
> {-1,0,+1} and {0,1,2} than for {0,1,2,...,19,20}  but in contrast
> question 2a got about the same support rates in all 3 towns.
>
> CONCLUSION:
> Voters want:
>
> Avg-based score voting (unspecified numerical scale) > Approval voting
> > 2-round plurality > MJ with 7-point verbal scale
>
> and
>
> plain plurality voting > IRV
>
> and
>
> Avg-based score voting with 3-point numerical scale (don't care if
> {-1,0,+1} or {0,1,2}) > Avg-based score voting with 21-point numerical
> scale.
>
>
>
> --
> Warren D. Smith
> http://RangeVoting.org  <-- add your endorsement (by clicking
> "endorse" as 1st step)
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Election-Methods mailing list
> Election-Methods at lists.electorama.com
> http://lists.electorama.com/listinfo.cgi/election-methods-electorama.com
>
>
> End of Election-Methods Digest, Vol 107, Issue 6
> ************************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20130508/734610c3/attachment-0003.htm>


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list