Public Acceptability Criterion: Difference between revisions

From Electowiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Araucaria
No edit summary
 
(Fixing the citation of Russ Paielli's statement of the criterion, and suggesting renaming it to Public acceptability criterion)
 
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
  +
{{rename|from=Public Acceptability Criterion|to=Public acceptability criterion}}
The Public Acceptibility Criterion is ot a true criterion as such, but more of a measure of how easy it will be to get the public to understand and adopt a new voting method.
+
The Public Acceptability Criterion is not a true criterion as such, but more of a measure of how easy it will be to get the public to understand and adopt a new voting method.
   
As suggested by Russ Paielli:
+
As suggested by Russ Paielli]<ref>http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2005-March/113392.html</ref>:
   
  +
{{definition|By the way, let me suggest another "criterion" for public acceptability. If voters have an election method carefully explained to them for, say, five or ten minutes, then most of them should be able to accurately paraphrase the rules on the first try. And they should also be able to do it days or weeks later, perhaps with only a brief one-minute refresher.}}
:By the way, let me suggest another "criterion" for public acceptability.
 
  +
If voters have an election method carefully explained to them for, say,
 
  +
Not a bad starting point. Anybody care to add more?
five or ten minutes, then most of them should be able to accurately
 
  +
paraphrase the rules on the first try. And they should also be able to
 
  +
== References ==
do it days or weeks later, perhaps with only a brief one-minute refresher.
 
  +
<references />
  +
  +
[[Category:Voting system criteria]]

Latest revision as of 03:14, 23 April 2022

The Public Acceptability Criterion is not a true criterion as such, but more of a measure of how easy it will be to get the public to understand and adopt a new voting method.

As suggested by Russ Paielli][1]:

By the way, let me suggest another "criterion" for public acceptability. If voters have an election method carefully explained to them for, say, five or ten minutes, then most of them should be able to accurately paraphrase the rules on the first try. And they should also be able to do it days or weeks later, perhaps with only a brief one-minute refresher.

Not a bad starting point. Anybody care to add more?

References[edit | edit source]