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
 
(6 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 "stand 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 "Reject" for voters who do not explicitly reject any candidates, and "Accept" otherwise.
## For any candidate they prefer, voters may also check "stand aside". (This is rarely useful; it is only worthwhile if they think that the candidate might become the leader in step 3 and stand in the way of a stronger compromise leader.) "Stand aside" has no effect if it is checked along with any option other than "prefer", or with no option.
# Candidates get 1 point for every ballot that prefers them.
# Candidates with over 25% Prefer, and less than 50% Reject, are called viable. If there are any viable candidates, the one with the most non-stand-aside preferences is given the label of leader.▼
## If the leader would not have been viable counting all "prefer/stand aside" votes as "reject", then the label of leader switches to the next lower candidate in non-stand-aside preferences.
# Viable candidates get 1 point for every ballot that accepts them and does not prefer the leader.
# Winner is the highest score.
 
# '''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 "stand aside" option would probably almost never be useful; certainly not enough to justify the extra complexity.▼
## 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 overat least 25% Prefer, and lessno more than 50% Rejectreject, are called "viable"'''. IfThe there are anymost-preferred viable candidates,candidate the(if one with the most non-stand-aside preferencesany) is given the label of 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 "stand aside" option would probably almost never be useful; certainly not enough to justify the extra complexity.
 
For instance, consider the voting scenarios which meet the following restrictions:
Line 21:
 
 
[[Category:Graded Bucklin systemsmethods]]
[[Category:No-favorite-betrayal electoral systems]]
{{DEFAULTSORT:PARFBP}}
Retrieved from "https://electowiki.org/wiki/FBPPAR"