[EM] New Thread: Needless voting disappointments

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 2024-03-19 05:49, steve bosworth wrote:
> *
> *
> 
> *Needless disappointments result from electing legislative bodies using 
> plurality, STV, or CPO-STV*
> 
> 
> Structurally, different portions of all the voters fail to help elect 
> their favored candidate for a legislative body. For example, when 
> electing a seven-member city council; about 50% of the voters are 
> disappointed when using plurality voting, and over 10% are disappointed 
> when using STV or CPO-STV. However, all these disappointments are 
> needless because a new and better way of voting guarantees that _every 
> voter_ is most likely to see one of the elected members as representing 
> their hopes and concerns. This system is called evaluative-proportional 
> representation (EPR): 
> /https://www.jpolrisk.com/legislatures-elected-by-evaluative-proportional-representation-epr-an- <https://www.jpolrisk.com/legislatures-elected-by-evaluative-proportional-representation-epr-an-algorithm-v3/>algorithm-v3/ <https://www.jpolrisk.com/legislatures-elected-by-evaluative-proportional-representation-epr-an-algorithm-v3/>//./
> 
> Each EPR ballot invites the voter to grade the suitability for office of 
> at least one of the candidates as either Excellent, Very Good, Good, or 
> Acceptable. Voters can grade as many of the candidates as they want, and 
> give the same grade to more than one candidate.
> 
> All these grades are counted to assure each voter that their one vote is 
> add to the total of the elected candidate who received their highest 
> available grade.
> 
> What do you think of the arguments detailed in the above link?

I would imagine that one could design proportional representation 
methods that, besides returning an outcome, would also return a weight, 
and every voter would have at least one way to change his ballot so that 
the weights would change.

Thus, if "no wasted votes" just mean that kind of weight-responsiveness, 
the property could probably be incorporated into other multiwinner 
systems as well, not just EPR.

Among these, EPR does have the advantage that it actually exists. I'm 
just saying that it's not an argument that disqualifies every non-EPR PR 
method at a stroke :-)

-km