Distributed Voting: Difference between revisions
m
no edit summary
Aldo Tragni (talk | contribs) (Tactical vote resistance better described) |
Aldo Tragni (talk | contribs) mNo edit summary |
||
Line 26:
===Normalization formula===
e
▲v1 := new value of candidate X.
<math>\begin{equation}▼
v1=\frac{v0}{1-\frac{e}{P}}▼
▲P := 100 (total points used in a vote)
\end{equation}</math>▼
▲<math>\begin{equation}
▲v1=\frac{v0}{1-\frac{e}{P}}
▲\end{equation}</math>
===Vote without 0 points===
Line 99 ⟶ 96:
Each voter, based on his own interests, creates the following 2 sets of candidates:
* Winner Set
* Loser Set
Given an honest vote, the tactical vote is obtained by minimizing the points of the Loser Set, maximizing the points of the Winner Set, and maintaining the proportions of honest interests within the two sets.
Line 171 ⟶ 168:
If the seats had different fractional value, in addition to determining the winning candidates, Distributed Voting also determine their % of victory, which are already indicated by the sum of the points of the winning candidates, remaining at the end of the counting.
===Vote writing===
To make the writing of the vote more comprehensible and simple, the voter can be left with almost complete freedom in the use of numerical values or only X. Before the counting process, the votes will be normalized to 100-point votes, where the Xs are considered as equal weight values.
X,0,0,0,0 → 100,0,0,0,0▼
X,X,X,X,0 → 25,25,25,25,0▼
4,3,2,1,0 → 40,30,20,10,0▼
40,6,3,1,0 → 80,12,6,2,0▼
101,0,0,0,0 → 100,0,0,0,0▼
999,99,9,1 → 89.17, 8.83, 1, 1▼
Original → Normalized in 100 points
In the last example the decimal values, which should be less than 1, are set to 1 and the remaining points are divided proportionally among the other candidates (it serves to prevent Distributed Voting from becoming like [[IRV]]).
| |||