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

[Michael Ossipoff]

Sorry, just one more thing that I’d like to add:

I said that when there’s some procedural issue with no alternative
acceptable to everyone, then someone calling for a vote could be the last
resort.

But of course the problem with that is that choosing a way to vote isn’t
this group’s strong suit.

So, if no alternative is acceptable to everyone, then wouldn’t it be a lot
simpler, easier & quicker to just go with the alternative that’s acceptable
to the most?

…& sorry, but I can’t resist saying, does that sound familiar?

On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 16:33 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> It’s probably a good principle for collective projects that procedural
> issues should be kept to a minimum.
>
> When such an issue is felt necessary, then it should be promptly raised.
> Most can be resolved by consensus-discussion, because there’s usually an
> alternative that everyone can accept.
>
> When not, then, as a last resort, someone can call for a vote.
>
> My inclination is to make as few issues as possible, with the actual doing
> of the project as the priority.
>
> So let’s now express our preference-ordering among the nominees.
>
> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 15:15 Michael Ossipoff <email9648742 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I too wrote some explanation with the ballot that I posted about 10
>> hours ago.
>>
>> I posted my ballot about 1 minute after the start of the voting-period.
>>
>> I told why I equal-ranked at least half of the alternatives.
>>
>> I told why I added an approval-set.
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 11, 2024 at 14:53 Richard, the VoteFair guy <
>> electionmethods at votefair.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I suggest creating a list of links to the associated Wikipedia or
>>> Electowiki articles, one for each method.  One person supplying all the
>>> links will save time for the rest of us.  Personally I'm going to need
>>> to read about some of these methods.
>>>
>>> As I rank them I'm adding a brief note to each method -- [in brackets]
>>> -- to help me keep track of the reasons for my ranking sequence, and to
>>> reveal to others my reasons for my ranking.  I might share my non-final
>>> ranking to give others an opportunity to change my mind.
>>>
>>> Richard Fobes
>>>
>>>
>>> On 4/11/2024 2:45 AM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
>>> >
>>> > The final list is, in random order:
>>> >
>>> > Smith//Score
>>> > Approval with manual runoff
>>> > Smith//Approval (explicit - specified approval cutoff)
>>> > Schwartz-Woodall
>>> > Copeland//Borda (also called Ranked Robin)
>>> > MinMax(wv)
>>> > Double Defeat, Hare
>>> > Plurality
>>> > Majority Judgement (as a category; includes usual judgement etc.)
>>> > IRV
>>> > Max Strength Transitive Beatpath
>>> > STAR
>>> > Woodall
>>> > Schulze
>>> > Baldwin
>>> > Black
>>> > Approval
>>> > Benham
>>> > Margins-Sorted Minimum Losing Votes (equal-rated whole)
>>> > Gross Loser Elimination
>>> > Smith//DAC
>>> > RCIPE
>>> > RP(wv)
>>> > Smith//Approval (implicit - of all ranked)
>>> > Margins-Sorted Approval
>>> >
>>> > In addition, the shorthand category
>>> >      "Condorcet-IRV"
>>> > corresponds to including (or equal-ranking) all of Benham, Woodall,
>>> and
>>> > Schwartz-Woodall.
>>> ----
>>> 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/20240411/3249abd6/attachment.htm>