this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2024
1050 points (98.9% liked)

politics

19144 readers
2176 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 75 points 2 months ago (2 children)

I'd take RCV over nothing, but STAR and approval are significantly better like the other user said.

Some reasons for approval

  • Addition is the only math involved. So it is extremely easy to get live results during counting. It makes auditing votes extremely easy.
  • It is dead simple to understand, so the least amount of voters will be confused by it.

A longer form explanation of some of the other stuff:

https://dividedwefall.org/star-and-approval-voting/

[–] snowsuit2654@lemmy.blahaj.zone 14 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Approval voting sounds good.

One issue I see with the star system is that people tend to have preconceptions about star ratings. E.g. some people never rate 5 stars on principle or will rate something 3 stars without realizing that is a 60% rating. My point is I think you might see some weird skew in the results based on this.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I can see that happening, which is why I think approval is the best of them all.

And with that said, so long as not all the votes are given equal scores, their votes would still matter even if they don't believe in 5 star perfection.

And IIRC, there is nothing actually stopping a STAR system from using a 1 to 10 point scale instead of 5, which would further help with that issue.

[–] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Let's ne honest though, that's not the real issue. The real issue is low info voters aren't going to have a nuanced opinion like. It will be 0 or 10. All of the votes coming in like this will invalidate any consideration you spent some time working out to decide a 7.5 is the perfect representation of how you feel.

Even more big picture. We are wasting our efforts arguing over the details of a voting system when voting reform isn't even on the table.

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 2 points 1 month ago

The real issue is low info voters aren’t going to have a nuanced opinion like. It will be 0 or 10.

Yeah. For the reason I think each candidate should be given one page to explain their policy. And that page should be printed out and available to all voters.

For mail in voters it should be included with their ballot.

Far too often I've voted in local elections and tried to research the candidate just to find no information on any of them. It's infuriating trying to make a choice when it's impossible to know anything.

We are wasting our efforts arguing over the details of a voting system when voting reform isn’t even on the table.

Agreed. But we can dream.

[–] xlash123@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I love how this video explains the differences between the voting methods. It's what made me prefer STAR over RCV.

https://youtu.be/Nu4eTUafuSc

[–] Olgratin_Magmatoe@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago

I am a little disappointed that they didn't include approval as one of the examples.

But still a fantastic video.