Range voting - Revision history

Woozle: "outcome error" details now on a separate page

2020-08-08T18:31:18Z

"outcome error" details now on a separate page

Woozle at 19:53, 7 August 2020

2020-08-07T19:53:58Z

Woozle: moved some explanation here from the "structural overview" page

2015-02-15T22:05:35Z

moved some explanation here from the "structural overview" page

Woozle: Created page with "category:techniques Range voting (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given de..."

2015-02-15T21:45:54Z

Created page with "category:techniques Range voting (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given de..."

New page

[[category:techniques]]
[[Range voting]] (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given decision. (Wikipedia [[wikipedia:range voting|defines it]] strictly in terms of voting for candidates in a formal election, but it need not be restricted to this usage.) The score must be within a predetermined range, so that everyone knows what the numbers mean (does "10" mean "acceptable" or "I love this"?).

My preferred system goes from -10 to +10, so that it's more obvious which numbers represent a vote ''against'' rather than ''for''. Ten possibilities on either side of zero (neutral = don't-care ≈ abstain) also make for a relatively intuitive, simple, clickable user interface (no typing needed). The +/- symmetry seems rather essential to me (despite some [http://rangevoting.org/Why99.html puzzling objections]), but I'm open to a finer granularity (perhaps allowing users to manually enter in-between numbers via a hidden "advanced" interface -- which also opens up the possibility of having a coarser granularity by default, because anyone who wanted finer granularity could still access it via the hidden interface).
==Advantages==
The key advantage to range voting, as I understand it, is that it more or less completely does away with the aggregation anomalies created by coarser voting systems, including:
* the [[issuepedia:Two-party system|two party "system"]]
** minority rule (the winner may only have the support of a small percentage)
** "strategic voting" (voting for "the lesser of two evils")
** "vote splitting" (a majority position losing its representation by being split across two or more candidates)
** the "spoiler" effect (3rd-party voters are punished)
* {{l/ip|gerrymandering}} is rendered ineffective
* 3rd-most-popular winners
==Disadvantages==
The main disadvantage of RV is that it involves the aggregation of much more data than traditional voting techniques. (This is an unavoidable consequence of what is also its greatest basic strength: the fact that it gives the system much more information about what each voter wants, making it possible to come much closer to satisfying everyone.) In the internet era, however, the difficulty posed by this added complexity vanishes to insignificance.

The other disadvantage to RV is that people aren't used to it, and tend to object to it on the basis of misunderstandings or false assumptions.
==Objections==
[http://rangevoting.org/RVcrit.html CRV] has a good collection of objections, and answers for each. (I may add more information here about any objections that seem to be especially popular.)
==Links==
===Reference===
* {{wikipedia}}
* {{issuepedia}}
===Projects===
* [http://rangevoting.org/ The Center for Range Voting] (CRV)
===Videos===
* [http://fixyt.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo The Problems with First Past the Post Voting Explained] (6:31) -- highly recommended
** (Interestingly, my reshare of this video is currently the top "comment" on [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo its YouTube page].)

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:53, 7 August 2020
Line 1:		Line 1:
	[[category:techniques]]		[[category:techniques]]
		+	[[category:voting]]
	[[Range voting]] (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given decision. (Wikipedia [[wikipedia:range voting\|defines it]] strictly in terms of voting for candidates in a formal election, but it need not be restricted to this usage.) The score must be within a predetermined range, so that everyone knows what the numbers mean (does "10" mean "acceptable" or "I love this"?).		[[Range voting]] (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given decision. (Wikipedia [[wikipedia:range voting\|defines it]] strictly in terms of voting for candidates in a formal election, but it need not be restricted to this usage.) The score must be within a predetermined range, so that everyone knows what the numbers mean (does "10" mean "acceptable" or "I love this"?).

@@ Line 13: / Line 13: @@
 * {{l/ip|gerrymandering}} is rendered ineffective
-It also results in the minimum net error of all the voting systems I'm aware of, where net error would be calculated as something like [[wikipedia:Root mean square|RMS]]:
+It also results in the minimum net [[outcome error]] of all the voting systems I'm aware of
 ==Disadvantages==
 The main disadvantage of RV is that it involves the aggregation of much more data than traditional voting techniques. (This is an unavoidable consequence of what is also its greatest basic strength: the fact that it gives the system much more information about what each voter wants, making it possible to come much closer to satisfying everyone.) In the internet era, however, the difficulty posed by this added complexity vanishes to insignificance.

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 [[Range voting]] (RV) is, in the most general sense, a voting system in which each voter assigns a score to each of the possible choices for a given decision. (Wikipedia [[wikipedia:range voting|defines it]] strictly in terms of voting for candidates in a formal election, but it need not be restricted to this usage.) The score must be within a predetermined range, so that everyone knows what the numbers mean (does "10" mean "acceptable" or "I love this"?).
-My preferred system goes from -10 to +10, so that it's more obvious which numbers represent a vote ''against'' rather than ''for''. Ten possibilities on either side of zero (neutral = don't-care &asymp; abstain) also make for a relatively intuitive, simple, clickable user interface (no typing needed). The +/- symmetry seems rather essential to me (despite some [http://rangevoting.org/Why99.html puzzling objections]), but I'm open to a finer granularity (perhaps allowing users to manually enter in-between numbers via a hidden "advanced" interface -- which also opens up the possibility of having a coarser granularity by default, because anyone who wanted finer granularity could still access it via the hidden interface).
+My preferred system goes from -10 to +10, so that it's more obvious which numbers represent a vote ''against'' rather than ''for''. Ten possibilities on either side of zero (neutral = don't-care &asymp; abstain) also make for a relatively intuitive, simple, clickable user interface (no typing needed).
 ==Advantages==
 The key advantage to range voting, as I understand it, is that it more or less completely does away with the aggregation anomalies created by coarser voting systems, including:
@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ** the "spoiler" effect (3rd-party voters are punished)
 * {{l/ip|gerrymandering}} is rendered ineffective
-* 3rd-most-popular winners
 ==Disadvantages==
 The main disadvantage of RV is that it involves the aggregation of much more data than traditional voting techniques. (This is an unavoidable consequence of what is also its greatest basic strength: the fact that it gives the system much more information about what each voter wants, making it possible to come much closer to satisfying everyone.) In the internet era, however, the difficulty posed by this added complexity vanishes to insignificance.
@@ Line 17: / Line 20: @@
 The other disadvantage to RV is that people aren't used to it, and tend to object to it on the basis of misunderstandings or false assumptions.
 ==Objections==
-[http://rangevoting.org/RVcrit.html CRV] has a good collection of objections, and answers for each. (I may add more information here about any objections that seem to be especially popular.)
+[http://rangevoting.org/RVcrit.html CRV] has a good collection of objections, and answers for each. (I'll add more information here about any objections that seem to be especially popular.)
 ==Links==
 ===Reference===