[EM] High Resolution Inferred Approval version of ASM

C.Benham 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 
Electoral Commission
hand vote-counters.

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.

Chris Benham


> *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...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20190621/207a9c11/attachment.html>

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list