electowiki

FBPPAR: Difference between revisions

← Older edit
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
imported>Homunq
No edit summary
Kristomun (talk | contribs)
1,245 edits
m fbc category
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1:
The following system is called FBPPAR voting, for "Favorite-Betrayal-Proof Prefer Accept Reject". It is a version of [[PAR voting]], with an extra "compromisestand aside" option in order to pass the [[favorite betrayal criterion]] (FBC).
 
Here's the procedure. Note that the two steps with extra indentation (1.1 and 3.1) only rarely matter, so it's best to understand the system without them first.
# Voters can Prefer, Accept, or Reject each candidate. Default is "Accept"; except that for voters who do not explicitly reject any candidates, default is "Reject". Voters can also mark a global option that says: "I believe that voters like me should be the first to compromise."
# Candidates with a majority of Reject, or with under 25% Prefer, are eliminated, unless that would eliminate all candidates. If a candidate would have been eliminatable considering all the "prefer" votes they got on "compromise" ballots as "rejects", then they are considered "eager to compromise"
# The winner is the non-eliminated candidate with the most points. Voters give 1 point to each candidate whom they prefer; and, if all the candidates they gave points to are "eager to compromise", they also give 1 point to each candidate whom they accept.
 
# '''Voters Prefer, Accept, or Reject each candidate.''' On ballots which don't explicitly use "Reject", blanks count as "Reject"; otherwise, blanks count as "Accept".
This is largely a theoretical proposal. In real-world elections, the "compromise" option would probably never be useful. ▼
## For candidates a voter prefers, they may also mark a "stand aside" option. This has no effect when combined with "accept" or "reject". It is useful for those rare cases when you prefer a candidate, and think they would be the leader in step 2, but do not think they can actually win; so that you think you'd be better off if voters like you compromise more.
# '''Candidates with at least 25% Prefer, and no more than 50% reject, are "viable"'''. The most-preferred viable candidate (if any) is the leader.
## When designating the leader (including who counts as "viable" for that purpose only), all "prefer/stand aside" votes count as if they were "reject".
# Each "prefer" is worth 1 point. For viable candidates, each "accept" on a ballot which doesn't prefer the leader is also worth 1 point. '''Most points wins.'''
 
▲This is largely a theoretical proposal. In real-world elections, the "compromisestand aside" option would probably almost never be useful. enough to justify the extra complexity.
 
For instance, consider the voting scenarios which meet the following restrictions:
Line 17 ⟶ 21:
 
 
[[Category:Graded Bucklin systemsmethods]]
[[Category:No-favorite-betrayal electoral systems]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:PARFBP}}
Retrieved from "https://electowiki.org/wiki/FBPPAR"