[EM] Fwd: Fwd: U/P voting: new name for simple 3-level method.
tdp201b at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Sep 13 09:19:13 PDT 2016
There is also the potential problem - as Chris Benham mentioned previously
- that the default vote is not the bottom rating. Arguably most people who
know how the system works would simply bottom rate candidates as their
default move if they aren't actively positively inclined towards them.
Others who aren't as familiar with the inner workings might not do this, so
arguably it makes it a bit of a two-tier system for voters. And that could
be seen as a failure of simplicity.
On Tuesday, 13 September 2016 02:38:04 UTC+1, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> Here's a new proposed variant of U/P with a simple default:
> Voters may rate each candidate as "unacceptable" (downvote), "preferred"
> (upvote), or "acceptable" (neither). Default is neither.
> Any candidate downvoted by most, or with fewer than half the max amount of
> upvotes, is disqualified, unless that would disqualify everyone. The winner
> is the remaining candidate with the most upvotes.
> The "fewer than half the max" rule prevents dark-horse winners, without
> resorting to strange defaults. It has no effect on a two-way chicken
> dilemma. Though in theory it could affect an evenly-balanced three-way
> chicken dilemma (in a four-way race), I think there's a negligible chance
> that such a scenario would be so balanced.
> I know that Chris doesn't like this method's violation of "irrelevant
> ballots". Myself, I think that no voters are irrelevant; even if they don't
> express an opinion between the two frontrunners, they may have one. (True,
> they may not; but that's not the first assumption I'd make.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Election-Methods