Equally Weighted Vote: Difference between revisions

Equally Weighted Vote (view source)

Revision as of 00:04, 7 July 2021

209 bytes added , 2 years ago

m

→‎Vote unitarity: Wordsmithing. Added a detail on what ballot designs can pass the test of balance.

VisualWikitext

Sarawolk

95

edits

Revision as of 19:10, 1 July 2021 (view source) Sarawolk (talk \| contribs) m (→‎Equal Vote Criterion: Clarified that the test of balance is for single-winner methods and added some clarifications to the vote unitiarity section to reflect upcoming edits to that page and maintain consistancy.) Tag: Visual edit ← Older edit		Revision as of 00:04, 7 July 2021 (view source) Sarawolk (talk \| contribs) m (→‎Vote unitarity: Wordsmithing. Added a detail on what ballot designs can pass the test of balance.) Tag: Visual edit Newer edit →
Line 8: === Equal Vote Criterion === Otherwise known as the Equality Criterion. Any single-winner voting method ~~or election~~ which passes the Test of Balance passes the [[Equal Vote Criterion]] and can be said to guarantee an [[Equally Weighted Vote]]. In order for a voting method to pass the test of balance the ballot must allow voters to give equal support to candidates, and there must be no limit as to the number of candidates who a voter can support. === The Test of Balance === Line 19: === '''Vote unitarity''' === One application of the Equally Weighted Vote ~~for~~in the ~~multi-winner~~context orof proportional ~~context~~representation is [[Vote unitarity\|vote unitarity]]. The basic idea is that the vote should stay equally weighted or reweighted throughout the election tabulation. A voter's influence on electing subsequent winners should directly depend on the amount of support given to prior winners. This means that an individual voter's vote weight is conserved throughout the process. There is an important nuance to this with regards to [[Surplus Handling]]; if, say, every voter gives one of the winners a top score, then instead of everyone's vote having no influence on the other winners, [[Vote unitarity\|'proportionate spending']] ensures a proportionate decrease in voting power, to ensure that the cost to elect a candidate is consistent, and to ensure that every voter still has a the correct amount of influence on the remaining winners. The simplest implementation of this is with [[Sequentially Spent Score]]. In summary, there is a ~~proportionate~~proportional relationship between how much support the voters give to the winners, the cost to elect a winner, and the amount of influence that is removed from the voters, to ensure that every voter has a chance to fairly elect someone they prefer. The prominent [[Single transferable vote\|Single Transferable Vote]], and [[Reweighted Range Voting]] methods fail vote unitarity.