4 ms·

"If we'd had a more nuanced system that allowed voting negative in addition to positive..." We must prove that something which may be more complex than our cur

by spynxic 10y ago

"If we'd had a more nuanced system that allowed voting negative in addition to positive..." We must prove that something which may be more complex than our current system is still just as fair (or more fair).

2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
Running simulations on voting systems is easy. Also lots of countries have preferential voting systems. Lots of people in AU don't vote for the major parties. The US system is just crazy.
Taek 10y ago
There are some simple changes which make pretty well understood improvements. For example rank voting. You rank the candidates when you vote. When counting, you count all the votes for each candidate. You eliminate the candidate with the fewest votes. Everyone who had that candidate as a first choice reallocates their votes to their second choice. Repeat until there's a winner. Suddenly it's okay to vote for that third party, because through rank voting you can ensure that your third party vote does not end up propping up the candidate you like the least.
- spynxic 10y ago
  That's genius! As it stands, if I were to vote for a 3rd party candidate then I'm essentially throwing away my vote. However, if what you suggest were in place then the risk of a meaningless vote is vastly decreased, essentially eliminated. Why isn't it used today?
  - 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
    Can't tell if you're being facetious or not. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting_system
  - 75j 10y ago
    Because the people with the power to change it aren't so keen on doing so, I'd guess.
    - spynxic 10y ago
      That inevitably supposes that there are a group of individuals with the power to change the voting system. Does such a group exist?
- adinobro 10y ago
  That is almost exactly how it works in Australia. You can either rank the vote manually or vote for a party and they get to pick how the vote is ranked between all the candidates.

by spynxic 10y ago

2muchcoffeeman 10y ago

Running simulations on voting systems is easy. Also lots of countries have preferential voting systems. Lots of people in AU don't vote for the major parties. The US system is just crazy.

Taek 10y ago

There are some simple changes which make pretty well understood improvements. For example rank voting. You rank the candidates when you vote. When counting, you count all the votes for each candidate. You eliminate the candidate with the fewest votes. Everyone who had that candidate as a first choice reallocates their votes to their second choice. Repeat until there's a winner. Suddenly it's okay to vote for that third party, because through rank voting you can ensure that your third party vote does not end up propping up the candidate you like the least.

spynxic 10y ago
That's genius! As it stands, if I were to vote for a 3rd party candidate then I'm essentially throwing away my vote. However, if what you suggest were in place then the risk of a meaningless vote is vastly decreased, essentially eliminated. Why isn't it used today?
- 2muchcoffeeman 10y ago
  Can't tell if you're being facetious or not. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting_system https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranked_voting_system
- 75j 10y ago
  Because the people with the power to change it aren't so keen on doing so, I'd guess.
  - spynxic 10y ago
    That inevitably supposes that there are a group of individuals with the power to change the voting system. Does such a group exist?
adinobro 10y ago
That is almost exactly how it works in Australia. You can either rank the vote manually or vote for a party and they get to pick how the vote is ranked between all the candidates.