EN :: minguo.info - democracy for the world

I’d like to get your opinion about four new voting system proposals.

There's an article about these methods in the Forum. It's entitled "The Voting Systems in the Voting System Poll".

There's no need to read the article unless you want to. I want your opinion whether you read the article or not. In fact, I mostly want your first impression, the way these voting systems seem to you without reading the article.

But, if you want to read the article, I urge you to vote first, before reading the article, and then (if you have time) vote again after reading the article. When you vote the 2nd time, indicate in a ballot "comment", or in a poll opinion posting, that you've voted before and after reading the article. Maybe you'll vote the same way the 2nd time, maybe not.

In this poll text, I'll define the methods that are being voted on. But first a few voting instructions or suggestions:

I'm not looking for comparison of the methods, or for one winner among them. Rate them all separately. If more than one are good, so much the better. No need for your ratings to reflect which is better, if two or more methods are acceptable.

If a method seems too complicated, so much so that you'd vote against its enactment, don't just pass it by with a "don't know". Give it a bad rating. Likewise, give a bad rating to any method that seems in any way unfair.

If you'd support a method, or vote for its enactment, give it a "Like". If you'd oppose a method or vote against its enactment, give it a "Dislike". Otherwise, give it an "Indifferent".

Your comments are invited. You can make comments about the particular methods by clicking on the "comment" button in the ballot. Or you can make comments in a poll opinion posting, as indicated below.

The first three methods are point rating methods. They differ from the usual 1-vote Plurality by letting the voter rate _all_ the candidates however s/he wants to. The fourth method is a rank-balloting method.

Now, to define the four methods:

-1,1:

Each voter may give to any candidate -1 point or 1 point. A negative point or a positive point.

The candidate with the highest point total, summed over all the voters, wins.

Obviously giving a candidate a negative point is as powerful as giving him/her a positive point, since your negative point can cancel out someone else’s positive point.

If people give a positive point to acceptable candidates, then the winner is the candidate acceptable to the most voters. The winner is also the candidate overall best-rated by the voters.

Emocracy -1,0,1:

Depending on the implementation, each voter may rate each candidate “Like”, “Dislike”, or “Neither”, where a “Dislike” gives -1 point; a “Like” gives 1 point; and a “Neither” gives 0 points--or the voter could just be asked to give each candidate -1 point, 0 points, or 1 point.

As with -1,1, the winner is the candidate with the highest vote total, summed over all the voters.

And, as with -1,1, the candidate who wins is the one who is overall best-rated by the voters.

The option of giving 0 points adds a little more expressivity to the ballot.

I re-emphasize that there is no need to choose among these methods. If more than one of them seem ok, that’s fine.

Approval:

Each voter may mark the names of as many (or as few) candidates as s/he wishes. The winner is the candidate who receives the most marks.

The ballot could say “Mark one or more candidate’s name:”

Like the preceding methods, Approval is a point rating method, allowing the voter to rate all of the candidates as s/he wishes.

MPOA:

The voters rank, in order of preference (1st choice, 2nd choice, 3rd choice, etc) as many candidates as they want to.

1. Every candidate over whom another candidate is ranked by a majority of the voters is disqualified (unless that would disqualify all the candidates).

2. Among the un-disqualified candidates, elect the candidate who is ranked on the most ballots.

***

So those are the four methods in this poll:

-1,1
Emocracy -1,0,1
Approval
MPOA

Please vote below. And, again, your comments on the methods are welcome.