4 ms·
The thing that surprises me from those graphs is that 100% strategic voting often led to a better result than 100% honest voting.
by elihu 5y ago
The thing that surprises me from those graphs is that 100% strategic voting often led to a better result than 100% honest voting.
- xpe 5y agoThis is by definition; honest voting is not rational (in the narrow sense of the term).
- elihu 5y agoNot necessarily; I think it's usually more of a prisoner's dilemma situation: if you optimize for getting what you want, then the overall outcome is worse. For example, in the results Borda count is much worse when everyone strategic votes. The new results contrast with an older simulation (graph shown down the page): https://electionscience.org/library/tactical-voting-basics/ https://electionscience.org/library/tactical-voting-basics/ Those results show honest voting always being (globally) better. That's one reason why I find the new results surprising.
- xpe 5y agoThanks for broadening the discussion beyond low-trust, purely self-interested rationality.