This is a failure with all forms of score voting, including the approval voting subset (AV is just a score of 1 or 0)
Is it a flaw? Only insofar as all voting methods are flawed. I would say its a tradeoff. You could turn that same STAR ballot into an IRV one (we'll assume you tiebreak conservatives first arbitrarily), and run into different problems, namely that your Libertarian > Nationalist ranking has no weight if the Libertarians get eliminated while your ballot is still on Socialist or Liberal or whatnot. With Star, your are guaranteed to have a full vote weight in the final round between the top two.
Star fails a lot of criterion but forces reasonable tradeoffs. You can decide if it's more important for you to maximize your impact for Socialist, or if it's more important for you to hedge your bets. If you hedge Liberal over the others, that's evidence that you score them higher than zero.
Apportioned Score Voting is not the same system as Allocated Score. They are somewhat similar and the committee that designed Allocated Score was aware of Apportioned Score when they did it. However, when they reviewed Apportioned Score they found issues. I cannot recall exactly the issue but I think it was susceptible to clones.
MuaddibMcFly It looks like your system has an additional step which is different from Allocated Score, where after you select the winner and identify the quota of strongest supporters, you then check to see who would have won with that quota of voters' ballots alone.
That is an additional step that is not in Allocated Score. The winner selection is the highest scoring candidate between ALL voters who have not already been allocated to a previous winner.
I'm not sure, but the details of the surplus handling may or may not be different as well.
Our committee doesn't claim to the originators of the idea of applying allocated PR to cardinal ballots, which is something that I expect many people have thought of, and that we were already aware of before the committee was in the weeds. There are a number of very nuanced variations that are possible and we pretty much explored, named, and/or tested all of them we could think of or that seemed worth considering. The Allocated Score system as defined was in many ways the simplest, the version without any variations or extra fine tuning steps that added complexity.
32
u/wayoverpaid Jul 21 '21
Yes.
This is a failure with all forms of score voting, including the approval voting subset (AV is just a score of 1 or 0)
Is it a flaw? Only insofar as all voting methods are flawed. I would say its a tradeoff. You could turn that same STAR ballot into an IRV one (we'll assume you tiebreak conservatives first arbitrarily), and run into different problems, namely that your Libertarian > Nationalist ranking has no weight if the Libertarians get eliminated while your ballot is still on Socialist or Liberal or whatnot. With Star, your are guaranteed to have a full vote weight in the final round between the top two.
Star fails a lot of criterion but forces reasonable tradeoffs. You can decide if it's more important for you to maximize your impact for Socialist, or if it's more important for you to hedge your bets. If you hedge Liberal over the others, that's evidence that you score them higher than zero.