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

[Chris Benham]

It can be difficult to be sure what is "propose-able" in the US and what 
isn't (especially from outside
of it.)   Sometimes relatively complicated things seem to catch on while 
no-one seems to be excited
about Approval.

I am not sure if  Margins Sorted Approval (specified) is "unproposably 
complex" or not.

I suspect Smith//DAC might be, but I don't know.

My three favourites with a big emphasis on simplicity and general 
"bang-for-buck" are:

Smith//Approval (Ranking)

Hare  (unrestricted and uncompelled strict ranking)

Approval

And my least preferred by those criteria include:

STAR

Approval with top-two manual Runoff

Majority Judgement (and other Median Ratings methods)

Chris


>
> *Kristofer Munsterhjelm*km_elmet at t-online.de 
> <mailto:election-methods%40lists.electorama.com?Subject=Re%3A%20%5BEM%5D%20Poll%20on%20voting-systems%2C%0A%20to%20inform%20voters%20in%20upcoming%20enactment-elections&In-Reply-To=%3C0f3688fb-e2c1-8618-f5fe-091cc3fc5cea%40t-online.de%3E>
> /Fri Apr 12 16:05:24 PDT 2024/
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> On 2024-04-12 22:37, Michael Ossipoff wrote:
> >/Right!! That’s something I wanted to say. I’m removing Schulze from the />/upper part of my ranking for that reason, & replacing it with />/Smith//Approval(implicit). />//>/How about we say to rank in order of overall merit for public />/proposal…which includes proposability? />//>/Then the unproposably complex methods could be left unranked or ranked />/near bottom. />//>/Or take it a step further & trim the candidate-set to only include />/proposable methods? But might it be quicker to just let that be a voting />/judgment, instead of having to do that evaluation as a separate />/preliminary collective evaluation, which would delay the voting? /
> I would prefer that the merit question for the poll stays the same:
> "which voting methods do you prefer to which others?", i.e. ranking them
> in preference.
>
> Then it would be up to the individual voter to consider what aspects of
> the method are most important; and anyone who wants to use it to guide
> reform can just screen away the unproposable methods.
>
> After all, we have to do that anyway, because it's pretty much
> impossible to collapse disparate concerns into a single order without
> making some assumptions about which concerns are most important. Would I
> recommend Benham ahead of Schulze? Well, that depends on whether there's
> tons of strategy in the place in question and whether they (and I) can
> accept the nonmonotonicity.
>
> In the absence of any such situational information, any order will be
> imperfect. In any case, if the poll's output ranking ends up being like
>
> Extrinsic Borda-Weighted Landau Intersection > Iterative Refinement
> Keener + Sinkhorn (mean) > Schulze > RP > Approval > IRV,
>
> then it's a simple matter for reformers to just discard everything above
> Schulze (or RP) for a public proposal. In practice, I doubt the exotic
> methods will rank that high anyway.
>
> -km
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240413/9c922564/attachment-0001.htm>