Favourability voting: Difference between revisions

Favourability Voting is a [[Cardinal voting|cardinal voting method]] based on both score voting and approval voting in which voters numerically score each candidate and/or party on both of two separately divided scales: for approval (numbers from 0.00 to 100.00) and disapproval (numbers from 0.00 to -100.00). For example, in the more simple version, Noncomparative Favourability Voting, someone can simultaneously express +57.80% approval and -45.70% disapproval (for a net favourability of +12.10%) at the same time for any single candidate or party they wish. These two do not ever need to add up to each other. The positive percentages are then subtracted by the negative percentages to reach an election outcome, and whoever wins the highest sum (net approval) is selected. Pairwise Favourability Voting is even more intricate as this is where you freely measure how much you approve and disapprove of each candidate and/or party not just only individually but also in every single last possible one-on-one matchup there is. This is done and treated as wholly independent of each other and matchups such as A vs. B and B vs. A once again do not have to add up to 100 since they are not tied to each other (i.e. one might rate A in disapproval as -33.10% against B but B -66.80% against A). As you can see, each cell is treated as a different scale from each other and thus intransitive (circular preference) results in matchups (such as A > B > C > A) are fully allowed as the calculation process, which is different from other pairwise methods in that an overall score for each candidate is derived from the summation of their personal score and matchup scores together, and as such manages to bypass Condorcet's paradox. Scientists have determined that circles of preference are a natural occurrence in humans and this is in fact how many of our thought processes play out.

The final sum for each of candidates or parties is then deduced from the net approvalfavourability of not only the individual but also matchup scores, calculated by reducing the approvals by the disapprovals, and whoever has the highest rating then wins the election.

This system encompasses all types of different possibilities: whereas in regular score voting, a voter who scores a candidate or party 50% could be interpreted as being three entirely different kinds of voters: someone who both loves and hates the entire platform, somebody who agrees with half of the platform but disagrees with the other half, or as a person who has neutral opinions (doesn’t necessarily approve nor disapprove) on the entirety of the premise (these are pretty clearly three different feelings from each other which essentially have little to nothing in common): Pairwise Favourability Voting understands this and captures these three unique opinions separately: the one who both loves and hates an entity ("love-hate relationship/frenemies") would give it closer to 100% on both approval and disapproval, those who likeslike half of something but dislikesdislike the rest of it ("meh/so-so") go to near 50% approval and 50% disapproval, whereas an indifferent participant ("whatever/I don't care") would put around 0% on both approval and disapproval), this level of expression allows for a better, more truthful way to sort out our preferences and for providing detailed statistical analysis.