[EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming enactment-elections

[Filip Ejlak]

First thing: it's surprising how all the options that have been mentioned
are single-winner methods, despite the poll subject not being worded in
such a restrictive way. Are multi-winner options allowed as well, or should
this be a different poll? Because it needs to be said that *every
legislative election needs proportional representation*. I guess any
single-winner method, no matter how good, will be bad in comparison with a
PR method. So if multi-winner options were allowed in the poll, I would
nominate *STV *(a Condorcet-compliant variant would be better if there was
any polynomial one with good recognition; an optional indirect element -
like GVT, but strongly improved - would also be nice).

And speaking of single-winner methods, in my opinion *Woodall* and
*Benham* seem
to be the best, at least among the well-known ones. While Woodall
(especially Schwartz Woodall) is perhaps marginally better, Benham is so
easy to explain (and it's a very obvious/natural way to make IRV actually
good) that it should be seriously considered by voting reform campaigners.
So I'd like to nominate these two.



Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, that’s true. It’s the reason why reform is needed, & the reforms
> should be compared to the worse current alternatives to show the need.
>
> I nominate:
>
> Approval
> RP(wv)
> Schulze
> MinMax(wv)
> IRV
> Plurality
>
> On Thu, Apr 4, 2024 at 04:06 John T Whelan <john.whelan at astro.rit.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> Given the purpose of the poll, I think FPTP should also be included,
>> since that's what the real world propositions are presumably to replace.
>>
>> John Whelan
>> jtw24 at cornell.edu
>>
>> ------------------------------
>> *From:* Election-Methods <election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com>
>> on behalf of Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
>> *Sent:* Thursday, April 4, 2024 1:13:28 AM
>> *To:* EM list <election-methods at electorama.com>
>> *Subject:* [EM] Poll on voting-systems, to inform voters in upcoming
>> enactment-elections
>>
>> EM used to do a lot of polls, but now never does. So I wouldn’t propose
>> one, if it weren’t for the fact that, this year, the voters of at least two
>> states are going to vote on whether to enact a certain voting-system.
>>
>> It seems to me—tell me if I’m wrong—that those people have a right to
>> know how people familiar with voting-systems feel about the relative merits
>> of some voting-systems.
>>
>> So, though I claim that polls are valuable for demonstrating the
>> experience of using the voting systems, & how they work, & what they’ll
>> do—& are therefore useful & worthwhile for their own sake—this poll that I
>> now propose isn’t a poll for its own sake.
>>
>> It is, as I said, proposed for the important practical purpose of letting
>> the voters in the upcoming enactment-elections know how we feel about the
>> relative merits of some voting-systems, including the one that they’re
>> about to vote on the enactment of.
>>
>> The voting-method for the poll:
>>
>> It seems to me that Schulze is the most popular ranked voting-system,
>> among the people at EM.
>>
>> …& it seems to me that the last time we voted on EM’s collective favorite
>> voting-system, Approval won.
>>
>> Those seem the top-two, in EM popularity.
>>
>> I prefer RP(wv) to Beatpath, mostly for its simple, intuitively natural &
>> obvious rule, but also for its LIIAC compliance, & the fact that its winner
>> usually pairbeats Schulze’s winner.
>>
>> But I guess Schulze is more popular due to its more efficient algorithm.
>>
>> Anyway so I suggest that the poll I propose have a Schulze balloting &
>> count, & an Approval balloting & count.
>>
>> Voting would consist of posting a ranking & an approval-set, in one post.
>>
>> Candidate voting-systems:
>>
>> My purpose isn’t an all-inclusive poll among all proposed voting-systems.
>> …just a very few ones that are the most popular here at EM, solely to have
>> a little comparison to the main voting system being publicly voted on this
>> year.
>>
>> So it should just be among a few voting-systems. Additionally, no reason
>> to make the alternatives-lineup too time-consumingly large by including
>> methods unlikely to win anyway.
>>
>> I’ll suggest a few obvious inclusions. But, of course every poll here
>> should have the possibility of nomination of whatever alternative anyone
>> wants to nominate.
>>
>> I’ll list my nominations in this post, & I claim that those few are all
>> the alternatives needed for the poll.  …& anyone can nominate anything
>> during a 1-week nomination-period.
>>
>> I suggest the following voting-systems as candidates in the poll, the
>> alternatives among which to vote:
>>
>> Approval
>> RP(wv)
>> Schulze
>> IRV
>>
>> (Schulze & RP are often said to be the ranked-methods most popular among
>> single-winner reform  community, & that seems true at EM.)
>>
>>
>> Is there any need for more alternatives than that?
>>
>> I suggest a nomination period of exactly one week, starting at the time
>> recorded as the posting-time-&-date of this post.
>>
>> After which a voting-period of exactly one month would start…at the exact
>> time as the end of the nomination-period.
>>
>> If there are no nominations (I suggest that none are needed) during the
>> nomination-period—& if, during the nomination-period, no one posts the
>> words “I second the suggestion of a poll”—then of course there’d not be a
>> poll.
>>
>> Again, I realize that polls are no longer popular here, but this is a
>> special situation, bringing a need for voters in the upcoming public
>> enactment-election to have a chance to hear how people at EM feel about
>> relative merit among voting-systems. So let’s make an exception to the
>> absence of polls here, for voters in the next election.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
> info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240405/22a6c022/attachment-0001.htm>