ClayShentrup
Joined 12 years ago
Karma
220
Submissions
346
Member since
Aug 15
Recent submissions
Comment · 2 days ago
there is no "scored approval voting". approval voting is literally score voting with a 0-1 binary score scale, and with the scores implicit in the state of an empty or filled oval.
Comment · 1 month ago
no, approval voting is drastically better than ranking.
1. greater voter satisfaction, with virtually any ratio of strategic to honest voting. (i.e. "more resistant to strategy")
2. drastically simpler. (same ballot, precinct summable, lower kolmogorov complexity)
3. transparent: each result is a simple scalar sum of support, so third party and independent candidates don't have their support hidden from view.
https://web.archive.org/web/20190219005733/https://sites.goo...
https://clayshentrup.medium.com/the-only-voting-reform-worth...
approval voting has worked great in fargo and st louis. https://approval.vote/
Comment · 2 months ago
Comment · 2 months ago
no, it would not be better. see voter satisfaction efficiency metrics from monte carlo simulation here.
https://clayshentrup.medium.com/the-proportional-representat...
Comment · 2 months ago
score voting is simpler and better than STAR voting in every way, and approval voting is radically simpler and better in most scenarios.
https://clayshentrup.medium.com/the-only-voting-reform-worth...
and PR is a red herring.
https://clayshentrup.medium.com/the-proportional-representat...
Comment · 4 months ago
approval voting would be absolutely massive in impact, i think far beyond what you're imagining.
Comment · 4 months ago
that's only true of federal elections, not universally tho.
Comment · 4 months ago
LOL, it's cardinal (rated) not ordinal (ranked), but yeah.
Comment · 4 months ago
i know. and my point was, that's irrational. other voters determine the election result YOU have to live with.
Comment · 4 months ago
that person is STRATEGIC VOTERS, who are about 90% of the electorate. even if you want to vote honestly, you're still subject to the whims of other voters.
indeed, practically the only thing that matters in a voting method is the aggregate affect of what it achieves in light of other voters. YOUR vote will almost never make a difference. you could upgrade voting methods in exchange for giving up your right to vote, and you'd still be drastically better off.
Comment · 4 months ago
it doesn't really matter how you define "honest". what matters is how people actually vote. the only really crucial distinction for "honest" versus "strategic" is that "honest" can't consider viability. in the simulations, we just use "approve everyone you like more than average". optimal strategy is to approve everyone you like more than the expected utility of the winner.
https://rangevoting.net/RVstrat6
here's lots of detail. you can run the code for yourself. https://www.rangevoting.org/BayRegDum.html
here's a slightly different model from the late harvard stats phd, jameson quinn. https://electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/
don't "trust" anything. look at the data. you could also read the book "gaming the vote" by william poundstone.
Comment · 4 months ago
score voting gets better results than the alternatives with ANY AMOUNT OF STRATEGIC VOTING.
https://www.rangevoting.org/BayRegsFig
https://electionscience.org/research-hub/tactical-voting-bas...