[EM] High Resolution Inferred Approval version of ASM
cbenham at adam.com.au
Thu Jun 20 21:01:03 PDT 2019
With paper and pencil ballots and the voters only writing in their
numerical scores it probably isn't very practical for the Australian
But if it isn't compulsory to mark each candidate and the default score
is zero, I'm sure the voters could quickly adapt.
In the US I gather that there is at least one reform proposal to use
these type of ballots. One of these, "Score Voting" aka "Range Voting",
proposes to just use Average Ratings with I gather the default score
being "no opinion" rather than zero and some tweak to prevent an unknown
candidate from winning.
So it struck me that if we can collect such a large amount of detailed
information from the voters then we could do a lot more with it, and if we
want something that meets the Condorcet criterion this is my suggestion.
> *How score voting works:*
> 1. Eachvote <https://rangevoting.org/MeaningOfVote.html>consists of a
> numerical score within some range (say0 to 99
> <https://rangevoting.org/Why99.html>) for each candidate. Simpler
> is 0 to 9 ("single digit score voting").
On 21/06/2019 5:33 am, Forest Simmons wrote:
> Chris, I like it especially the part about naive voters voting
> sincerely being at no appreciable disadvantage while resisting burial
> and complying with the CD criterion.
> From your experience in Australia where full rankings are required (as
> I understand it) what do you think about the practicality of rating on
> a scale of zero to 99, as compared with ranking a long list of
> candidates? Is it a big obstacle?
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Election-Methods