Wikimedia explicit approval elections: Difference between revisions

[[File:2018 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee ballot.png|thumb|An explicit approval ballot for a [[W:Wikipedia:Elections#Arbitration%20Committee|Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election]], which defaults to abstention]]

'''Explicit approval''' voting is a [[Ratings ballot|rated voting system]] which is essentially [[Approval voting]] with abstentions. In order to allow abstention, voters must explicitly state disapproval. So, the ballot will list ''Approve'' and ''Disapprove'' for each candidate, and leaving a candidate without either mark represents abstention. The winner is the candidate who has the highest approval among those who didn't abstain: A/(A+D)<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|title=Explicit Approval & Hybrid Approval voting|url=https://www.reddit.com/r/EndFPTP/comments/c6chef/explicit_approval_hybrid_approval_voting/|website=r/EndFPTP subreddit|access-date=2019-08-12|language=en}}</ref>

By itself, this leads to the possibility of an unknown dark horse candidate winning with only a few approve votes and many abstentions. This can be prevented through the use of various quorum rules,<ref name=":0" /><ref>{{Cite web|title=Averaging|url=https://rangevoting.org/Averaging.html|website=RangeVoting.org|access-date=2019-08-12}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|title=Better "Soft Quorum" Rule|url=https://rangevoting.org/BetterQuorum.html|website=RangeVoting.org|access-date=2019-08-12}}</ref> but hasn't seemed to be a problem in actual elections, despite abstention being common.

== Usage ==

''This should be split into an article like the others in [[:Category:Rated method elections]]''

Wikimedia and Wikipedia elections are held using an equivalent system, in which voters must choose ''Support'', ''Oppose'', or ''Neutral'' for every candidate. The winner is the candidate with the highest support percentage: the highest proportion of ''Support'' votes out of combined ''Support'' and ''Oppose'' votes = S/(S+O).

Approval voting is generally equivalent to 2-level [[Score voting]] (where the levels are "0" and "1"). Wikimedia's variant is equivalent to 2-level Score voting where voters may explicitly abstain, and the default choice is to abstain. The levels in Wikimedia's system imply (−1, +1) rather than (0, 1), so they may be affected by the psychological consequences of [[disapproval voting]].<ref>See also [[W:Combined approval voting#Properties|Wikipedia:Combined approval voting#Properties]], in particular [[W:Combined approval voting#cite%20ref-7|the Baujard citation]]</ref>

The Wikimedia Foundation has used this method for Board of Trustees and Funds Dissemination Committee elections in [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2013/Results 2013], [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections_2015/Results 2015], and [https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_elections/2017/Results 2017], after previously using [[Approval voting]] and [[Schulze method]]. Wikipedia uses this in a non-binding way for Administrator nominations,<ref>[[W:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship#Decision%20process|w:Wikipedia:Requests for adminship#Decision process]]</ref> etc.

=== Analysis ===

[[File:Approvalballotchoice.png|thumb|An explicit approval ballot on which the voter has not expressed any abstentions]]

While Explicit Approval and [[W:Combined approval voting|Combined Approval]] have equivalent ballots, they are not tallied the same. For example, if Candidate A received 5 Approvals and 5 Abstentions, while Candidate B received 9 Approvals and 1 Disapproval:

* Under Explicit Approval, Candidate A would win, with 5/(5+0) = 100% support, vs Candidate B's 9/(9+1) = 90% support.

* Under Combined Approval, Candidate B would win, with 9-1 = 8 points vs Candidate A's 5+0 = 5 points.