STAR voting: Difference between revisions
move proposed variants to the end, simplify redundant intro
Psephomancy (talk | contribs) (move proposed variants to the end, simplify redundant intro) |
|||
Line 1:
{{wikipedia}}'''STAR voting'''<ref>{{Cite web |url = https://www.starvoting.us/ |title = STAR voting - front page |last = |first = |date = |website = starvoting.us |publisher = |access-date = 2018-7-10 |quote = STAR voting. }}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url = https://ivn.us/2018/07/09/revolutionary-new-voting-method-bolstered-16000-voters-oregon-county/ |title = Revolutionary New Voting Method Bolstered By over 16,000 Voters in Oregon County |date = 2015-07-09 |newspaper = The Independent Voter Network |access-date = 2016-7-10 }}</ref> is an [[Voting method|electoral system]] [[:Category:Single-winner voting methods|for single-seat elections]]. The name stands for "score then automatic runoff", referring to the fact that this system is a combination of [[score voting]]
[[File:Score Runoff Voting sample presidential ballot.png|thumb|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.]]
Voters cast ballots as in score voting, rating each candidate on a numerical scale. The two candidates with the highest total
== Usage ==
Line 81:
A simpler way of finding the STAR ranking is simply to put the STAR winner 1st, and then rank all of the other candidates below the STAR winner according to their Score voting ranking.
<br />
== Modifications ==▼
A modification to STAR that takes degree of preference more into account would be to make each voter's vote in the runoff only as strong as the highest score they gave to any candidate. In other words, a voter who gave their favorite a 3/5 (3 out of 5) would have only 3/5ths of a vote in the runoff, rather than a full vote. This modification allows voters to express less-than-full support for any candidate in both the score round and the runoff. ▼
Example: <blockquote>2 A:1 D:5▼
3 A:5▼
6 B:4▼
Scores are A 17 B 24 D 10, with B pairwise beating A 6 to 5. So the Score and STAR winner is B. But taking into account that those who preferred B over A all have their favorite a maximum of a 4 out of 5, if we weight their runoff votes at 80%, then now B loses the runoff 4.8 to 5. So A wins under modified STAR.<ref>https://forum.electionscience.org/t/star-but-with-weak-votes-in-the-runoff-when-voters-dont-give-any-candidate-the-top-score/615/5</ref></blockquote>Voters could also be allowed to indicate they want their rated preference to be used in the runoff, rather than ranked preferences i.e. a voter who scored the two candidates a 5/5 and 3/5 would give 1 vote to the first candidate and 0.6 votes to the second. This is related to [[Rated pairwise preference ballot#Rated or ranked preference]], and the vote-counting can be done in the same way. ▼
[[Instant Runoff Normalized Ratings|IRNR]] is related to STAR in the same way that [[IRV]] is related to [[Top-two runoff]]. ▼
Given that STAR is an automatic form of Score voting + Runoff, one can also create an automatic "[[Approval voting]] + Runoff" method by allowing voters to rank or score candidates, and then indicate an [[Condorcet//Approval|approval threshold]] for a particular rank or score such that they'd approve all candidates at that same rank or score or a higher rank or score, and then use the ranks or scores to figure out which of the two most approved candidates is preferred by a majority.▼
== Precinct summability ==
Line 258 ⟶ 245:
|Democratic Party
|>
| colspan="5" |
|<big><u>100</u></big>
|<big><u>-</u></big>
Line 265 ⟶ 252:
|<big><u>85 '''(-4 Loss)'''</u></big>
|107
| -
|88
| -
|94
|114
| -
|57
| -
|118
|133
| -
|59
| -
|97
|-
Line 287 ⟶ 274:
|<u><big>-</big></u>
|<u><big>85 '''(+4 Win)'''</big></u>
| colspan="5" |
|109
| -
|82
| -
|98
|97
| -
|67
| -
|125
|101
| -
|69
| -
|119
|-
Line 307 ⟶ 294:
|>
|88
| -
|107
| -
|94
|82
| -
|109
| -
|98
| colspan="5" |
|97
| -
|60
| -
|132
|111
| -
|78
| -
|100
|-
Line 331 ⟶ 318:
|>
|57
| -
|114
| -
|118
|67
| -
|97
| -
|125
|60
| -
|97
| -
|132
| colspan="5" |
|86
| -
|74
| -
|129
|-
Line 355 ⟶ 342:
|>
|59
| -
|133
| -
|97
|69
| -
|101
| -
|119
|78
| -
|111
| -
|100
|74
| -
|86
| -
|129
| colspan="5" |
|}
For simplicity, the candidates have been sorted by scores, with their scores in bold in their own pairwise comparison cell. The top two candidates are not tied scorewise with anyone else, so they both are in the automatic runoff. Between the two, "I don't like party politics" is pairwise preferred (has 4 more votes in the matchup), so it wins.
▲== Modifications ==
▲A modification to STAR that takes degree of preference more into account would be to make each voter's vote in the runoff only as strong as the highest score they gave to any candidate. In other words, a voter who gave their favorite a 3/5 (3 out of 5) would have only 3/5ths of a vote in the runoff, rather than a full vote. This modification allows voters to express less-than-full support for any candidate in both the score round and the runoff.
▲Example: <blockquote>2 A:1 D:5
▲3 A:5
▲6 B:4
▲Scores are A 17 B 24 D 10, with B pairwise beating A 6 to 5. So the Score and STAR winner is B. But taking into account that those who preferred B over A all have their favorite a maximum of a 4 out of 5, if we weight their runoff votes at 80%, then now B loses the runoff 4.8 to 5. So A wins under modified STAR.<ref>https://forum.electionscience.org/t/star-but-with-weak-votes-in-the-runoff-when-voters-dont-give-any-candidate-the-top-score/615/5</ref></blockquote>Voters could also be allowed to indicate they want their rated preference to be used in the runoff, rather than ranked preferences i.e. a voter who scored the two candidates a 5/5 and 3/5 would give 1 vote to the first candidate and 0.6 votes to the second. This is related to [[Rated pairwise preference ballot#Rated or ranked preference]], and the vote-counting can be done in the same way.
▲[[Instant Runoff Normalized Ratings|IRNR]] is related to STAR in the same way that [[IRV]] is related to [[Top-two runoff]].
▲Given that STAR is an automatic form of Score voting + Runoff, one can also create an automatic "[[Approval voting]] + Runoff" method by allowing voters to rank or score candidates, and then indicate an [[Condorcet//Approval|approval threshold]] for a particular rank or score such that they'd approve all candidates at that same rank or score or a higher rank or score, and then use the ranks or scores to figure out which of the two most approved candidates is preferred by a majority
==See also==
| |||