While Ranked Pairs sound good in theory, how would you actually sell this method to normal people? Transparency is one of the basic requirements for the acceptability of a vote, and this method will be beyond maybe 70-80% of the American public, if not more.
Well, a lot of them don’t really understand the current system either.
What is important is how are you, as a voter, gonna vote for the person you want to win. In the end, it’s either choose one or rank them from top to bottom.
What could be the problem is tallying several million individual votes, let alone putting them into a computer. I wonder what the algorithmic complexity is for this system.
Having a FOSS voting system would enable electronic voting without the baggage. Decentralize the means to certify votes. End to end encryption and anonymization always. If there are groups of people who disagree with the vote, they get separated from the main group and given land and territory of their own. That’s how I’d do it.
If its anonymous how do you keep malware from voting for people. Do you also intend to first solve computer security THEN solve government as well? Voting by mail is already reasonably easy to secure.
It’s pseudonymous and is the best anonymous voting option we have. They aren’t actually tied to people’s personal information and you know this. A blockchain will therefore be perfectly fine.
If no electronic option is good enough for you, remember the tyrants of today and yesterday have already mastered rigging the paper ballot and they likely already do have your voting history tabulated in some archive somewhere. If you think blockchains are a security nightmare, then the ID system to tie voters to paper ballots will give you PTSD.
The voting system will be the Tideman method
While Ranked Pairs sound good in theory, how would you actually sell this method to normal people? Transparency is one of the basic requirements for the acceptability of a vote, and this method will be beyond maybe 70-80% of the American public, if not more.
I don’t think using ignorant Americans as a policy standard is going to achieve anything.
Well, a lot of them don’t really understand the current system either.
What is important is how are you, as a voter, gonna vote for the person you want to win. In the end, it’s either choose one or rank them from top to bottom.
What could be the problem is tallying several million individual votes, let alone putting them into a computer. I wonder what the algorithmic complexity is for this system.
Having a FOSS voting system would enable electronic voting without the baggage. Decentralize the means to certify votes. End to end encryption and anonymization always. If there are groups of people who disagree with the vote, they get separated from the main group and given land and territory of their own. That’s how I’d do it.
If its anonymous how do you keep malware from voting for people. Do you also intend to first solve computer security THEN solve government as well? Voting by mail is already reasonably easy to secure.
Just use a blockchain.
This destroys anonymity its a public ledger and how do you imagine that helps security. Your vote is only as secure as your shitty insecure computer.
It’s pseudonymous and is the best anonymous voting option we have. They aren’t actually tied to people’s personal information and you know this. A blockchain will therefore be perfectly fine.
If no electronic option is good enough for you, remember the tyrants of today and yesterday have already mastered rigging the paper ballot and they likely already do have your voting history tabulated in some archive somewhere. If you think blockchains are a security nightmare, then the ID system to tie voters to paper ballots will give you PTSD.
FOSS has nothing to do with security. Decentralization works as long as there are more good than bad actors, otherwise you got a recipe for disaster.
Technology for that exists. We just need to use it.
There are voting methods hard to explain, this one is quite easy: “the winner must win against most of the other candidates on a 1x1 comparison”
And to avoid making n² voting rounds, we rank our preferences, the first beats all, the second beats all but the first…
Still overly complicated, especially for American minds who have been trimmed for decades to rate anything scientific as work of the devil…
If people can get sports leagues rules to win a championship, they can get this.
Any ranked choice voting system is subject to Arrow’s theorem; range/score/approval voting would be more effective.
“more effective” depends on which criteria you value for your voting system to have.
I value the Condorcet Winner, majority and independence of clones criteria.