carbon_based @ carbon_based @sh.itjust.works

Posts

0

Comments

25

Joined

2 yr. ago

Thanks for the recognition!

It is all true that different ways of evaluation will lead to different results. That can be understood though, and i think that i can wrap my mind around the maths of it (yet perhaps not everyone could, no offence intended). Some ways are more appropriate in certain context, some are inherently unfair, etc. -- My suggestion should have been meant towards more accuracy ...

But maybe let's forget about this entirely, and look here: Ranked Choice Voting https://sh.itjust.works/post/311690

Fine idea.
Given it can get extracted by script, we could simply instruct each vote should contain a list of rankings in a specific format, like ... brainstorming:

• Let's say, there are 5 options/candidates, a vote could look like
  4,5,2,1,3
  where candidate 4 would get 5 points, candidate 5 gets 4 points, and so on.
• Separators could be made flexible, "4, 5, 2, 1,3"... to make it a bit syntax-tolerant.
• The script/bot should be able to return two lists, each with username / home instance / points per candidate / original posted string; one list with positive recognition (and totals) and one for the erroneous. Could be put in spreadsheets or posted as tables.
• It would work with only two options as well.

Edit ...
The more i think about it, the more i come to the pont that this method would be elegantly simplistic. [shoulderpat] ;-)

• It's highly accessible, no fancy stuff or external tools required. All can be done with what is available in Lemmy anyway, and it's client-agnostic.
• A bot could post like three .csv lists; the two detailed ones i suggested above, and a "tally" one, that could already contain some fancy statistics, like votes per instance, or double usernames.
• All is openly accessible.

Cons:

• Perhaps not as error-resistant as a custom interface would be ... but errors can happen anyhow.
• Concealed voting is not possible.

Alerts:

• If there is no way to rank options equally, then in an equal-preference situation, the option which is listed first on the ballot will likely have an advantage. People are more likely to enter numbers in order than to swap them.
  Fix: should have a way to assign equal rank to options, like
  (4, 5), 2
  In this example, 4 and 5 would get (5+4)/2=4.5 points each (not 5 because that would give slightly more total weight to the vote), 3 points for option 2, and (2+1)/2=1.5 points to each of the remaining options 1 and 3. (And no such things are not too complex for my mind, as someone elsewhere wanted to suggest to me.)
• My suggestion here is counting all rankings, not having a winner determined by the sums of first choices, which would introduce some complexity and possible elimination of ballots: https://ballotpedia.org/Ranked-choice_voting_(RCV)
  So rather than giving the first choice an excessive gravity and counting second choices only if that didn't meet the threshold (thereby determining a majority from the rankings at the cost of ballots that didn't present a full ranking), this allows for determining even or "unconclusive" preferences. I also had the possibility of multiple selection in mind. Keep it simple.

That could be another way to gauge the outcome. I just suggested to get into account the actual disapproval also (if we were that advanced, i'd wish we could have weighted disapproval voting anyway, but i can't hope that people understand the advantages of that). Why would my way of counting the approval ratio rather than approval-only be of any disadvantage? I mean, that way it would include the total number of participants as well, and an approval ratio would be a more robust decision-maker than just a fixed goal of absolute agreement. And why should i not want to improve on stuff? :-)

But anyway, this was meant to suggest how to improve the ballot itself (after all, that's the topic of the discussion here). So aside from how ever votes are to be counted, i suggest to include all that information in the ballot.

Perhaps add explainer:
This poll is based on the preceeding discussion: [link]. Please make yourself familiar with the discussion before voting.
There is a choice between several options.
Upvote those options you would agree with, downvote those you would not agree with.

(comment to abstain? I know this could be abused. ...)

Add an option: "Do not change the current mode of registration."

... and i like to edit: Some information on how the final choice will be made may also be helpful (this could differ by subject): "The option on which the ratio of upvotes [(sum-of-votes -- downvotes) / sum-of-votes] exceeds that of all others by at least 1.5 : 1 will be implemented; should none meet that target no change will be made."

/c/aboringdystopia@lemmy.world
Made it work for you.