PRO-V: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Aldo Tragni (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Aldo Tragni (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 2:
The objectives of this voting system is the balance between simplicity, resistance to strategies, elect utilitarian winner and provide the voter with a good representation of interests (range with 5 ratings).
===Name derivation===▼
PRO-nV: the PRO-V procedure works with ranges of different sizes and n indicates the amount of ratings used in the range.▼
*PRO-3V: uses 3 ratings.▼
*PRO-V: is the default definition, with 5 ratings.▼
*FAIR-9V: uses 9 ratings.▼
==Procedure==
Line 57 ⟶ 49:
[x1, x2, x3, x4, x5]
Adapting the scale to the context allows the voter to represent their interests well, maintaining simplicity in the vote (which always has only 5 ratings) and also more resistance to strategies.
▲===Name derivation===
▲PRO-nV: the PRO-V procedure works with ranges of different sizes and n indicates the amount of ratings used in the range.
▲*PRO-3V: uses 3 ratings.
▲*PRO-V: is the default definition, with 5 ratings.
▲*FAIR-9V: uses 9 ratings.
==Voting systems comparison==
Line 62:
===[[FAIR-V]]===
The proportional ratings of the PRO-V make the intermediate ratings more used by the voter, because eg. adding these two votes A[
However, the PRO-V procedure is easier to understand than the FAIR-V one, and also offers a wider range of ratings to the voter.
|