[EM] Please test Evaluative-proportional representation (EPR) that is now available

[steve bosworth]

To all,
Thank you Kristofer for guiding me how to put my description of Evaluative-proportional representation (EPR) on my electowiki account. I understand that anyone who would like to test the claims that my co-authors and I make for EPR can do so simply by creating their own account at
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Special:CreateAccount and

then log in with the account, go to the EPR page here:
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Evaluative_Proportional_Representation , and
click on "edit" and perhaps then perhaps on to the "Discussion" button.

I look forward to any person's comments, questions, criticisms, counter arguments, etc.

Also, below is a copy of my first draft which you will also find at https://electowiki.org/wiki/Evaluative_Proportional_Representation
Best,
Bozy

3/13/2025 (Bozy):
Evaluative Proportional Representation (EPR) is a proportional extension of Majority Judgment<https://electowiki.org/wiki/Majority_Judgment>, devised by Stephen Bosworth.[1]<https://electowiki.org/wiki/Evaluative_Proportional_Representation#cite_note-1>
EPR is only related to the Expanding Approvals Rule<https://electowiki.org/wiki/Expanding_Approvals_Rule> in that it invites voters to “approve” any number of the candidates. However, EPR also allows the voter to more expressively specify each approved candidate’s suitability as either Excellent, Very Good, Good, or Acceptable. Disapproved candidates can be indicated by Poor or Reject. All ungraded candidates are counted as a Reject.
Each voter’s ballot is guaranteed equally to add to the weighted vote of one of the elected candidates in the legislative body. For example, each of the elected members of a seven-member city council will have a different weighted vote in the council exactly equal to the different seven highest numbers of ballots counted for them according to the rules of the count as explained below.
Compared to known voting methods, EPR is most like proportional ranked-choice voting (PRCV, also called single-transferable vote (STV)). However, EPR instead invites voters to rank candidates by grading their suitability for office as either Excellent, Very Good, Good, Acceptable, Poor, or Reject. Voters can award the same grade to more than one candidate. Each EPR ballot contains only one vote.
All these grades are counted to guarantee that each EPR voter will be represented equally in the weighted vote of the elected candidate who had received either the voter’s highest grade, their highest remaining grade, or their proxy vote. Consequently, EPR maximizes the quality of each citizen’s vote, as well as enabling each citizen’s vote to quantitatively count equally through the weighed vote of in the legislative body of the candidate their vote had helped to elect.
Additionally, EPR’s qualitative grades enable voters to express more clearly their different degrees of support or oppositions to different candidates. For example, in contrast to an EPR voter, a plurality, Condorcet, approval, ranked-choice, or score voter cannot secretly communicate whether their 1st choice candidate is their least bad or best candidate. Each citizen’s EPR ballot enables them secretly to reveal the values that led them to grade the candidates as they did. Their values are probably more aligned with the values displayed by a candidate they graded Excellent than one they judged only to be Acceptable or Poor.
Consequently, analyses of each EPR-post-election report would probably provide everyone with much more information about the priorities of all their fellow voters that could be extracted from studies of all the post-election reports of any other known voting system – to inform everyone about the exact numbers and intensities with which all voters are aligned with the values expressed by each candidate. In this way, the qualitative advantage of using grades by EPR voters would seem to enable everyone to learn more about the realities of their society than is offered by any other election method.
As a result,100% of the voters are equally represented quantitatively in the legislative body through the weighted voting of the member of the legislative body they helped to elect. Qualitatively, the voter’s grade for that winning candidate optimally assures the voter that the values of this winner are aligned with theirs. These benefits seem not to be delivered by any other type of PR currently being used in the world. EPR optimally respects the democratic principle that each citizen’s vote should count equally.
Exactly how an EPR election would be counted is provided by the EPR Count: Detailed Description link listed under “Supplementary Materials in GitHub” located on the last page of our published article: "Legislatures Elected by Evaluative Proportional Representation (EPR): an Algorithm.  "https://www.jpolrisk.com/legislatures-elected-by-evaluative-proportional-representation-epr-an-algorithm-v3/)]
P.S. When ready our following 2020 article, please replace "proportionality" with "proportional." "Legislatures Elected by Evaluative Proportional Representation (EPR): an Algorithm"<nowiki>https://www.jpolrisk.com/legislatures-elected-by-evaluative-proportional-representation-epr-an-algorithm-v3/)





________________________________
From: Kristofer Munsterhjelm
Sent: Sunday, March 9, 2025 7:10 AM
To: steve bosworth
Subject: Re: [EM] Evaluative-proportional representation (EPR) is now on electowiki. Feedback please.

On 2025-02-01 03:49, steve bosworth wrote:
> Dear Kristofer,
> Please guide me on how properly to enter EPR onto electowiki.

Sorry for the late reply.

I thought you meant that you had already put EPR up on Electowiki. If
you'd like to, create an account at
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Special:CreateAccount

Then log in with the account, go to the EPR page here:
https://electowiki.org/wiki/Evaluative_Proportional_Representation , and
click on "edit".

-km
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20250314/dd9931b3/attachment.htm>