STAR voting: Difference between revisions
m
clean up, typos fixed: Chatanooga → Chattanooga (2)
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (Harmonizing on "voting method" terminology) |
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) m (clean up, typos fixed: Chatanooga → Chattanooga (2)) |
||
Line 8:
=== Political use ===
The concept was first proposed publicly in October 2014 by Center for Election Science co-founder Clay Shentrup.<ref>{{Cite web |url = https://groups.google.com/d/msg/electionscience/JK82EFn7nrs/Lble3V2CW4UJ |title = Google Groups |website = groups.google.com |access-date = 2017-04-05 }}</ref> The runoff step was introduced in order to correct for strategic distortion in ordinary score voting,<ref>{{Cite web |url = https://ivn.us/2016/12/08/score-runoff-voting/ |title = Score Runoff Voting: The New Voting Method that Could Save Our Democratic Process |date = 2016-12-08 |website = IVN.us |access-date = 2017-04-05 }}</ref> such as [[Bullet voting]] and tactical maximization.<ref>{{Cite news |url = http://equal.vote/strategic_srv |title = Strategic SRV? - Equal Vote Coalition |work = Equal Vote Coalition |access-date = 2017-04-05 }}</ref> Thus, STAR is intended to be a compromise between [[score voting]] and [[instant runoff voting]].<ref>{{Cite news |url = http://equal.vote |title = Equal Vote Coalition |work = Equal Vote Coalition |access-date = 2017-04-05 }}</ref> The movement to implement STAR voting was centered in [[w:Oregon|Oregon]], and in July 2018, supporters submitted over 16000 signatures for a ballot initiative in [[w:Lane County, OR|Lane County]]. This is enough to qualify this proposal to be on the ballot, if the measure is deemed well-drafted.
==Types==
STAR voting uses a [[ratings ballot]]; that is, each voter rates each candidate with a number within a specified range, such as 0 to 5 stars.<ref>{{Cite web |url = http://rangevoting.org/RateScaleResearch.html |title = Rating Scale Research |last = |first = |date = |website = RangeVoting.org |publisher = |access-date = 2016-12-11 |quote = The evidence surveyed here currently suggests that the "best" scale for human voters should have 10 levels }}</ref>
[[File:Score Runoff Voting sample presidential ballot.png|thumb|"Score Runoff Voting", an old name for STAR voting, uses a standard Score Voting ballot. The counting method adds an extra step to yield the preference winner between the top two scoring candidates overall.]]
Line 65:
|}
The frontrunners are Nashville and Chattanooga. Of the two, Nashville is preferred by 68% (42+26) to 32% (15+17), so Nashville, the capital in real life, likewise wins in the example. In this particular case, there is no way for any single city of voters to get a better outcome through tactical voting. However,
For comparison, note that traditional first-past-the-post would elect Memphis, even though most citizens consider it the worst choice, because 42% is larger than any other single city. [[Instant-runoff voting#Tennessee capital election|Instant-runoff voting]] would elect the 2nd-worst choice (Knoxville), because the central candidates would be eliminated early. In [[Approval voting]], with each voter selecting their top two cities, Nashville would win because of the significant boost from Memphis residents. A [[Two-round system#Example II|two-round system]] would have a runoff between Memphis and Nashville where Nashville would win.
| |||