Revision as of 22:26, 21 January 2010 (view source) imported>Araucaria (Score Voting is now my favorite) ← Older edit		Revision as of 22:28, 21 January 2010 (view source) imported>Araucaria No edit summary Newer edit →
Line 10: * The number of runoff candidates should be at least three, not two. Why? Since Range does not penalize a voter for rating more than one candidate, the extra choice will increase the level of debate. With the current two-party duopoly, there is an implicit agreement to avoid discussing complicated issues. Why do I favor [[Range voting]] over [[Approval voting\|Approval]]? It ~~allows~~lets the voter express more nuance in their selection. While it may be better strategically (from an individual voter's point of view) to give maximum score to all acceptable candidates, ratings allow the voter to express partial approval for other viewpoints, if only to encourage them to keep contributing to public discourse. For many years I favored [[Condorcet method\|Condorcet completion methods]] such as [[Schulze]] or [[River]], especially with [[Cardinal pairwise]] weighting to take advantage of a ratings ballot. However, I have come to realize that

Araucaria

User:Araucaria (view source)