Follow

Who'd have thought that one of the most effective ways to make voting more representative is simply to remove the rule "you must only vote for one candidate"

electionscience.org/library/ap

· · Web · 3 · 4 · 6

@cjd
>Note that ranked choice voting is the same as instant-runoff voting (IRV).

bullshit

@cjd turns out that some people use "Ranked Choice Voting" in capital letters as a more specific term to refer to IRV, but that's misleading as fuck, they should come up with a better name

@cy @cjd
>like IRV but multiple seats

that's STV

both are examples of ranked voting methods. But there are also other ranked voding methods, such as Borda or Schulze, which select one winner but work differently than IRV. Referring to IRV and/or IRV as "the Ranked Choice Voting" is misleading and makes people think there are no other ranked voting rules.

@cjd I agree there is absolutely no reason any nation wouldn’t use approval voting, other than for the benefit of crooks getting rich from screwing us over. It’s easy, effective, fair, and just… who decided you can only vote for one candidate? It was a rich crook, wasn’t it.

If we could have electronic voting, it’d be cool to combine an optional score, so you could draw a line at how much you want to vote for a candidate or not.

@cjd
Yes, how incredible that democracy would work better if one enabled citizens to give as much relevant information as possible about their opinion!
In that respect, I believe that, though mentioned voting systems are an improvement, using something like the #MajorityJudgment would be orders of magnitudes better and a necessary step towards a (slightly more) functional representative system

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Mastodon

Server run by the main developers of the project 🐘 It is not focused on any particular niche interest - everyone is welcome as long as you follow our code of conduct!