Voting methods (example & experiment)
- This topic has 19 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
You should be able to vote once a day. Did you put a different name? I note that the vote count has gone uop by two since I posted today, so maybe your vote has gone through? One of the votes today just ranked everything 13, so maybe that was you?
YMS, it would not let me vote . I followed the link in your post 12 and it simply said 'You have already voted'
I would be pleased with the leader so far: World Socialist Party UK.
OK, poll ended:http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/cgi-bin/results.pl?id=E_498584c6116bc7ebSome points. I could have chosen cartoon characters, favourite deserts, or anything, but I wanted somethign people on the board could feel connected to. I was only after non-random preference orderings, so I was a touch narked when a few people took the poll seriously enough to just enter spoilt or effectively blank ballots — though I suppose it is illustrative of what would happen in practice.Yes, there were some errors in set up that could have been overcome with more preparation. Is houldn't have allowed voting while write in votes were in operation (that meant that early votes cast effectively didn't count against about half the options); I think I shouldn't have allowed "No opinion" options, again, because that meant a straight abstention, it would have been better to have forced a low ranking; none of the above should have been called re-open nominations. And "Breat Britain".Aside from that the results have been moderately instructive.So, if we had only had a first past the post race, the results would have been:World Socialist Movement (Britain) 4World Socialist Party UK3None of the above2World Socialist Party of Breat Britain2World Socialist Movement UK1World Socialist Party (Britain)1World Socialist Party (GB)1World Socialist Party (UK)1Clearly, opinion would be split, and the result would be unsatisfactory to many (and lack a mjaority legitimacy). So, by some procedure, to make a decision, we'd have to winnow down the choices. Yes, we could have gone to a committee, but the result would have been the same, a choice of a less preferred option for some of the electorate, at least the below actually reflects the degree to which people support alternatives. 123456789101112131. B : World Socialist Party UK -978897108898102. A: World Socialist Party of Breat Britain 3-7867968877103. World Socialist Movement UK (write-in) 76-9891071298784. World Socialist Movement (Britain) (write-in) 765-8867968855.
World Socialist Movement in Great Britain 5667-7768788106. World Socialist Party (Britain) (write-in) 56567-97996767. World Socialist Party (UK) (write-in) 644774-7987758. C: World Socialist Party of England and Scotland 1556545-6676109. World Socialist Party (GB) (write-in) 76367557-887610. World Socialist Movement (GB) (write-in) 765775577-88511. F: Common Ownership League 3545476565-7912. E: The Wage Labour Abolition Society 45454665755-1013. None of the above (write-in) 233625626632-World Socialist Party UK is the undisputed winner, ranked above evry other choice by more voters.What I'd suggest is that we could use such polls, not to make final decisions, but in place of the committee (or by a wider committee), after which we could have a fuller vote on either confirming the result, or between the top two choices. The rich information given by the rankings helps us understand trends in thought.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.