Thread: Defining the Maemo Community Council voting procedure
View Single Post
brokenladder is offline brokenladder
2008-11-09 , 17:40
Posts: 11 | Thanked: 4 times | Joined on Sep 2008
#18
Originally Posted by lardman View Post
What's wrong with the plain "vote for 5 or fewer candidates" method (5 as that's the number we want, fewer so people don't just fill in the gaps with people they don't know anything about).
What if I do take the time to research all the candidates? In the last mayoral election here in San Francisco, we had like 10 choices.

If people don't know enough about a candidate, they can just give him a zero - which is what you're proposing we force them to do.

We can even allow an "abstain" option, and look at average scores instead of totals.

Shouldn't this accurately represent the wishes of the community. I don't really see why we should rank the choices, which has uses when you're electing and wish to also know the positioning of the elected.
I'm not proposing ranking, I'm proposing rating. The reason why is, to pick better winners, as measured via Bayesian regret:
http://scorevoting.net/BayRegDum.html

If you are a sane rational person, then you want the greatest expected happiness with election results. Therefore you want the best voting method possible, so you aren't forced to be any less happy than you could be.

Then again, I don't know anything about voting theory so please do shoot me down
Too late.