[EM] U/P voting: new name for simple 3-level method.

Kevin Venzke stepjak at yahoo.fr
Wed Sep 7 21:52:01 PDT 2016

Hi Jameson,
MCA (the one with three slots) has the simpler description surely? If there's a majority preferred, elect the most preferred; else elect the most approved (least disapproved).
There is another method where you elect the approval winner unless there are multiple candidates with a majority, in which case preferred ratings break the "tie."
Your earlier message says "The winner is the non-disqualified candidate with the most approvals" but I assume this should say "most preferred."
So you are saying if nobody manages to get majority approval, you will only be using the top ratings and ignoring "acceptable" ratings? That is unusual; my instinct is that if we can't find a majority we should try to find votes to get as close as possible. There's a risk that you are collecting enough information to permit concluding e.g. that a simultaneous approval and Condorcet winner lost.
I don't see why you are making rules for unmarked candidates if your intended advantage is simplicity. I believe you explained why you have this to somebody else, so I won't ask you to repeat, but I wonder about the effect of the sentence that starts "And second." You're saying that if A has majority preferred+acceptable, but is not top two on preferred ratings, to count blanks as disapproved in hopes that this might remove A's majority approval (or rather, non-disapproval)? Aside from the weird Clone-Loser issue in having a top-two rule on a ratings ballot, it feels a little schizophrenic to me that you really want winners to have majority non-disapproval yet do not actually think it indicates a worthy candidate.
I tend to think we will be lucky if we can consistently get even one majority non-disapproved candidate in elections. In a U/P race with two major candidates, one of those is basically guaranteed to get the label penalty in the next race.

      De : Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>
 À : EM <election-methods at lists.electorama.com>; electionsciencefoundation <electionscience at googlegroups.com> 
 Envoyé le : Mercredi 7 septembre 2016 12h59
 Objet : Re: [EM] U/P voting: new name for simple 3-level method.
The main advantage of U/P voting over other systems like MJ or MCA is simplicity of description. So I'm going to try to describe it as simply as possible.
To vote, you rate each person running as "preferred", "acceptable", or "unacceptable". You can rate any number at each level.
If more than half of voters rate a person "unacceptable", that person can't win, unless the same is true of all the people running. Of those remaining, the winner is the one rated "preferred" by the most voters.
If you leave all three ratings blank for a candidate, that usually means the same as rating them "acceptable". There are two exceptions. First, if you made a mark to rate some candidates "acceptable", then the ones you didn't make any mark for are counted as "unacceptable". And second, if the two most-preferred candidates both can't win, because more than half of voters marked them "unacceptable", then candidates with no mark count as "unacceptable". That way, you don't end up letting a weak candidate win by mistake.
2016-09-06 13:17 GMT-04:00 Jameson Quinn <jameson.quinn at gmail.com>:

I've recently posted a few messages discussing a simple 3-level graded Bucklin method:

Ballot: For each candidate, you may rate them “preferred”, “acceptable”, or “unacceptable”. Any candidate, including an incumbent, who had gotten over 50% "unacceptable" in the prior election would have a note to that effect next to their name on the ballot. (In prior messages, I'd suggested not allowing them on the ballot. I now think that allowing them on, but with a note, would be better.)
Counting: For the current eIection, if some but not all candidates have a majority (50%+1) of “unacceptable” votes, then they are disqualified. The winner is the non-disqualified candidate with the most approvals. 
My new name for the above system is U/P voting. It stands for "unacceptable/preferred", and can be pronounced "up voting" for quick discussion; or "you pee voting" if necessary to avoid confusion.

Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20160908/1e8d1ae1/attachment.htm>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list