4 ms·
>putting in a dishonest vote for a non-preferred candidate because that provides a better chance at matching their preferences This still somewhat exists. For
by garaetjjte 4y ago
>putting in a dishonest vote for a non-preferred candidate because that provides a better chance at matching their preferences
This still somewhat exists. For example, with score voting: preferences A>B>C but you really hate C, and he's leading in polls. It might be reasonable to "dishonestly" score B higher. This minimizes chances that C wins, and while it doesn't harm A it does decrease strength of your preference for A>B. "Dynamic range compression" is good way to put it, or maybe "ballot influence conservation": one ballot has fixed influence, and you can either spend it entirely on A/B>C or A>B/C, or any ratio in between.
- naniwaduni 4y agoYeah, "dynamic range compression" on a score vote does feel a bit dishonest—kind of independently of whether it's actually "strategic", actually. Personally, this is a major factor in preferring approval over score vote, which requires someone who intuitively "feels", say, a 0.3/0.6/0.7 about candidates to either vote 0/0.75/1 to maximize their vote spread, or give more influence to people who do. Notice that this is not strategic in Gibbon's sense—it is always better to vote 0/0.75/1 than it is to vote 0.3/0.6/0.7—but it's probably more counterintuitive!