4 ms·
> I don't want to vote in a way in which my statement is that I equally prefer the Democratic candidate to Green Party candidate. This is a pervasive logical f
by ClayShentrup 8y ago
> I don't want to vote in a way in which my statement is that I equally prefer the Democratic candidate to Green Party candidate.
This is a pervasive logical fallacy, we call the "expressiveness fallacy".
https://sites.google.com/a/electology.org/www/expressiveness https://sites.google.com/a/electology.org/www/expressiveness
In short, you could allow partial approvals (1/4, 1/3, etc.), or mathematically equivalent ratings on a 0-N scale. But Approval Voting behaves almost as well in aggregate.
http://scorevoting.net/BayRegsFig.html http://scorevoting.net/BayRegsFig.html
And IRV/RCV will maintain two-party duopoly.
https://asitoughttobe.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/ https://asitoughttobe.com/2010/07/18/score-voting/
Voting theory is highly counterintuitive.
- r00fus 8y agoI'm not sure I follow your "IRV favors duopoly" article. I looked at the data, and it's analysis and facts don't match. Kiss is the clear winner in Burlington 2009 almost any way you slice it.
- ClayShentrup 8y agoNope. Montroll is preferred to both rivals by a huge majority. http://scorevoting.net/Burlington.html#UngerApp http://scorevoting.net/Burlington.html#UngerApp
- AstralStorm 8y agoExpressiveness fallacy is averted if you use global scales and score system instead of ranking system. E.g. Majority Judgement. It is not exactly counterintuitive that aggregated orderings have problems - the problems relate to the fact that ordering cannot be averaged and ties are not allowed. The latter problem also happens in the oldest score system called Bucklin voting. Approval voting is essentially 0-1 score voting system with ties.
- ClayShentrup 8y agoMajority Judgement is severely flawed compared to Score Voting and Approval Voting. http://scorevoting.net/MedianVrange http://scorevoting.net/MedianVrange
- nessus42 8y ago> This is a pervasive logical fallacy, we call the "expressiveness fallacy" I don't particularly like to argue over semantics, but this is not a "logical fallacy". It may be some sort of fallacy, but it's not a logical one.