2 ms·

What's the appeal over straight approval voting, which can be explained and justified in about three sentences, and almost self-evidently produces good-enough r

What's the appeal over straight approval voting, which can be explained and justified in about three sentences, and almost self-evidently produces good-enough results?

godelski 6y ago
There's more finesse in STAR. Because you are better able to specify __how much you approve__ this leads to higher voter satisfaction.
- rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
  Is there any hard evidence for this? I'm sure there would be higher voter satisfaction among the types of folks that study alternative election systems and don't mind reading about every candidate on their ballot, but more convoluted systems generally lead to lower voter satisfaction because they're required to do more work/studying up front to maximize their voting power, and the results are more difficult to interpret. Most voters walk into a polling place with 1 or 2 people they like, 1 or 2 people they don't like, and a bunch of people they don't care about, which is perfectly fine, and it should be taken into account with any proposed voting system.
  - godelski 6y ago
    What do you mean hard evidence? In all the sims (which you can find many more and much more detailed ones than what I listed, STAR's website has many itself[0]) it yields better satisfaction than approval. This should be obvious that it is. > the results are more difficult to interpret. Are you concerned about it being complicated? I'm sorry, but I just don't buy this argument. These types of scales are in questionnaires everywhere. I don't buy that people are so stupid that they can't just score a candidate. Even if they just ranked them it wouldn't have a large effect on the outcome. In fact, this can fix accidents with ranked choice where people accidentally rank candidates the same rank. And if a significant amount of people are that dumb, well it still works out. Leaving an entry blank counts as a score of 0. You can score only a single candidate if you want, that's fine. > but more convoluted systems generally lead to lower voter satisfaction because they're required to do more work/studying up front to maximize their voting power You aren't required to do anything. And honestly, a lot of people do look into multiple candidates. Hell, the entire primaries are essentially people doing background research on candidates. But if they don't, sure, that's just called dishonest voting, which STAR handles better than ranked. I honestly don't understand this type of criticism. It hinges on the idea that the average voter is dumber than a rock. > Most voters walk into a polling place with 1 or 2 people they like, 1 or 2 people they don't like, and a bunch of people they don't care about, which is perfectly fine, and it should be taken into account with any proposed voting system. You do realize that STAR accounts for this, right? You don't have to vote for everyone. If you just liked Biden you could just give him any number greater than 0 and your vote would be for him. At WORST STAR is identical approval. [0] https://www.starvoting.us/ https://www.starvoting.us/

What's the appeal over straight approval voting, which can be explained and justified in about three sentences, and almost self-evidently produces good-enough results?

godelski 6y ago

There's more finesse in STAR. Because you are better able to specify __how much you approve__ this leads to higher voter satisfaction.

rrrrrrrrrrrryan 6y ago
Is there any hard evidence for this? I'm sure there would be higher voter satisfaction among the types of folks that study alternative election systems and don't mind reading about every candidate on their ballot, but more convoluted systems generally lead to lower voter satisfaction because they're required to do more work/studying up front to maximize their voting power, and the results are more difficult to interpret. Most voters walk into a polling place with 1 or 2 people they like, 1 or 2 people they don't like, and a bunch of people they don't care about, which is perfectly fine, and it should be taken into account with any proposed voting system.
- godelski 6y ago
  What do you mean hard evidence? In all the sims (which you can find many more and much more detailed ones than what I listed, STAR's website has many itself[0]) it yields better satisfaction than approval. This should be obvious that it is. > the results are more difficult to interpret. Are you concerned about it being complicated? I'm sorry, but I just don't buy this argument. These types of scales are in questionnaires everywhere. I don't buy that people are so stupid that they can't just score a candidate. Even if they just ranked them it wouldn't have a large effect on the outcome. In fact, this can fix accidents with ranked choice where people accidentally rank candidates the same rank. And if a significant amount of people are that dumb, well it still works out. Leaving an entry blank counts as a score of 0. You can score only a single candidate if you want, that's fine. > but more convoluted systems generally lead to lower voter satisfaction because they're required to do more work/studying up front to maximize their voting power You aren't required to do anything. And honestly, a lot of people do look into multiple candidates. Hell, the entire primaries are essentially people doing background research on candidates. But if they don't, sure, that's just called dishonest voting, which STAR handles better than ranked. I honestly don't understand this type of criticism. It hinges on the idea that the average voter is dumber than a rock. > Most voters walk into a polling place with 1 or 2 people they like, 1 or 2 people they don't like, and a bunch of people they don't care about, which is perfectly fine, and it should be taken into account with any proposed voting system. You do realize that STAR accounts for this, right? You don't have to vote for everyone. If you just liked Biden you could just give him any number greater than 0 and your vote would be for him. At WORST STAR is identical approval. [0] https://www.starvoting.us/ https://www.starvoting.us/