[EM] Name for suggested Approval implementation: EMV Earn My Vote

[Forest Simmons]

Prelude: imagine a cumbersome version of approval in which each voter gets
a separate approval ballot for each candidate and has a month to submit
them whether one-by-one or en masse.

As soon as you are satisfied with a candidate's commitment to earn your
vote, you mark it with a thumbs-up and send it in. The ballots you never
send in are not counted as approval.

Perhaps to earn your trust they have to sign on to a movement or pledge to
support medicare, green new deal, BDS, etc.

The sooner they respond, the sooner you can decide if you trust them. As
the results trickle in they are published as a running tally that helps
inform voters' strategy decisions as well as candidates' willingness to
make various pledges.

The candidate that ends up with the greatest number of approvals wins.

Transition:

That's too cumbersome to be practical. So what can we do to preserve the
spirit of this method while making it more practical?

The main feature that we want to preserve is a time interval for
negotiation between voters and candidates during which there is bargaining
for approval votes in a transparent setting.

Main Movement:

Voters get only one ballot, but next to each candidate name there are three
choices ...
1. A "like" icon (thumbs up)  2. A reject icon (thumbs down) or 3. A
question mark (?).

Before the barganing/negotiation session starts the voters fill in the
ballots and submit them. The respective thumbs up and down icons are used
only for those candidates that they already unconditionally trust or
reject, respectively, while question marks are placed next to the names of
the remaining candidates. These question marks are to be resolved during
the negotiation session.

Some ballots may have no question marks while others may consist almost
entirely of question marks. If there is only one candidate with a thumbs up
icon, then that candidate by default is the one that will serve as proxy
for the ballot owner in the bargaining session. Otherwise the voter must
clearly indicate which of the thumbs-up candidates is to be delegated proxy
status.

Before the bargaining session starts a chart is published detailing the
"assets" or bargaining chips of the respective candidates, in other words,
how many question marks each proxy has to resolve for each of the other
candidates. During the negotiations the chart is updated for all to see.

When all question marks are resolved the candidate with the greatest number
of thumbs up is elected. This number is the same as the total number of
ballots minus the minimum number of thumbs down.

CODA:

The icon for this method is

"[ear] v [thumbs down]"

which means "listen or be rejected"

Comments?
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20201104/31802439/attachment.html>