3 ms·

What about "Path Vote" AKA the Schulze method? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method "The Schulze method (

What about "Path Vote" AKA the Schulze method? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schulze_method "The Schulze method (/ˈʃʊltsə/) is an electoral system developed in 1997 by Markus Schulze that selects a single winner using votes that express preferences. The method can also be used to create a sorted list of winners. The Schulze method is also known as Schwartz Sequential dropping (SSD), cloneproof Schwartz sequential dropping (CSSD), the beatpath method, beatpath winner, path voting, and path winner. The Schulze method is a Condorcet method, which means that if there is a candidate who is preferred by a majority over every other candidate in pairwise comparisons, then this candidate will be the winner when the Schulze method is applied."

godelski 6y ago
Condorcet methods get discussed a lot but they are pretty complicated. I believe that they are discussed because they maximize VSE, such as Schulze. I'll reference my comment in this thread because the VSE link has what I'm talking about. The problem is they are less resistant to strategic voting (though much better than IRV and plurality). But let's just keep it dumb and simple with cardinal systems. Approval is dead simple and gets you pretty much all the way there on most of the criteria. If you want to add a little bit of complexity, STAR makes things even better because it gives you some more specificity (and slightly improves upon score/range). Every time we talk about electronic voting everyone always brings up the matter of simplicity, well, that matters here too. With approval and score you're literally just creating a matrix. STAR you have two rounds (top two from the previous round). Ordinal methods are pretty complex and much more prone to mistakes because of such. You don't need a PhD to understand approval (it is actually how I solve the "where should we eat" problem). [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563236 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563236
- ulucs 6y ago
  Schulze has a very nice geometric interpretation, but I should get off my ass and get the working paper ready to be released first.
  - godelski 6y ago
    Let's be real: plurality is trivial, approval is dead simple, score is easy, IRV is so so, Schulze is complex. That is, in determining the winner. In plurality you just count the number of votes. Largest number wins. max(sum(votes) In approval you just count the number of approvals. Candidate with the most approval wins. (max(sum of columns(votes)) Score you actually have to create a matrix! IRV you have recursion! Schulze you have both and graph theory! I just don't see the appeal. Sure, it has a slightly better VSE than STAR if everyone is voting 100% honestly (that condition is a key part!) but it just isn't appealing when you consider other criteria. Especially when we talk about simplicity. Approval is essentially trivial but also has a lot of other criteria going for it. How much does VSE matter? Especially if you still aren't combating spoilers (I'll give you that Schulze does better than IRV at spoilers).
  - jabl 6y ago
    Come on, just look at the wikipedia page for the Schultze method. There are matrices, graphs, and stuff. That might be fine for a technical community like Debian, but for a society filled with average Joes and Janes, not so much. Democracy needs trust, including the average person being able to understand how something as fundamental as voting works. That's one of the main reasons my favorite is approval voting.

godelski 6y ago

Condorcet methods get discussed a lot but they are pretty complicated. I believe that they are discussed because they maximize VSE, such as Schulze. I'll reference my comment in this thread because the VSE link has what I'm talking about. The problem is they are less resistant to strategic voting (though much better than IRV and plurality). But let's just keep it dumb and simple with cardinal systems. Approval is dead simple and gets you pretty much all the way there on most of the criteria. If you want to add a little bit of complexity, STAR makes things even better because it gives you some more specificity (and slightly improves upon score/range). Every time we talk about electronic voting everyone always brings up the matter of simplicity, well, that matters here too. With approval and score you're literally just creating a matrix. STAR you have two rounds (top two from the previous round). Ordinal methods are pretty complex and much more prone to mistakes because of such. You don't need a PhD to understand approval (it is actually how I solve the "where should we eat" problem). [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563236 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24563236

ulucs 6y ago
Schulze has a very nice geometric interpretation, but I should get off my ass and get the working paper ready to be released first.
- godelski 6y ago
  Let's be real: plurality is trivial, approval is dead simple, score is easy, IRV is so so, Schulze is complex. That is, in determining the winner. In plurality you just count the number of votes. Largest number wins. max(sum(votes) In approval you just count the number of approvals. Candidate with the most approval wins. (max(sum of columns(votes)) Score you actually have to create a matrix! IRV you have recursion! Schulze you have both and graph theory! I just don't see the appeal. Sure, it has a slightly better VSE than STAR if everyone is voting 100% honestly (that condition is a key part!) but it just isn't appealing when you consider other criteria. Especially when we talk about simplicity. Approval is essentially trivial but also has a lot of other criteria going for it. How much does VSE matter? Especially if you still aren't combating spoilers (I'll give you that Schulze does better than IRV at spoilers).
- jabl 6y ago
  Come on, just look at the wikipedia page for the Schultze method. There are matrices, graphs, and stuff. That might be fine for a technical community like Debian, but for a society filled with average Joes and Janes, not so much. Democracy needs trust, including the average person being able to understand how something as fundamental as voting works. That's one of the main reasons my favorite is approval voting.