h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: In favor of fair elections - A87824424
Author: Happy Nerd - U8584330

All in favor? Any opposed?

Hi Happy Nerd.

This is an interesting and informative entry. You avoided getting bogged down in the detail.

You say these are five common systems. Do you know how common? In my country we use a ranked voting system but I thought that was quite rare.

How many people have to be using a particular voting system before it's okay with you that I use the word common, Gnomon?

Could you explain how these systems relate to other commonly used terms like 'first past the post' and 'single transferable vote', for example?


Geggs

Yes, I can do that, Geggs. I thought someone else was doing that though, and didn't want to rain on another researcher's parade. Do you know who else is researching in the area of election theory?

I found this one: A87709666 Seems like there was another?

Here's another STV Entry A58593180 and the Flea Market Entry is A4199141

I think your Entry is excellent alongside the more detailed one, though - this provides a general introduction to the basic principles of a variety of systems to enable comparison - very interesting

I would also like to see mention of some real life voting systems, to see where they fit in, eg First Past the Post, etc.

There are a couple of points I'm not clear about:

"Voters dislike the runoff election system because they are often forced to lie."

In the Runoff, Candidate Fantastic fans can vote for Candidate Fantastic in the first round, and in the second round they either don't vote or vote for the one they prefer out of the two remaining options, so I don't see why they are lying. I see that if they don't vote, then Terrible will win, but if voters vote for Fantastic, then Terrible doesn't automatically win, because there is still a choice between Terrible and Marvelous in the next round.

Or is it that the lying comes in in the first phase (and in Select One), where you suspect your preferred candidate is unlikely to get the most (or even the second most) votes so you vote for another candidate that isn't Terrible?

"If we focus on ballot scoring, it’s possible for an unqualified candidate or unwise proposal to prevail. "

In the Conclusion, it seems that Ranked etc are good except when they are not good... I think I'm not clear about the definition of "good" - so a bad candidate is good as long as they are popular?

I'll leave that to you to decide, HN, once you've presented the figures.

"Select One" is First past the post. "Ranked voting" is single transferable vote.

Okay if you are going to be that way Gnomon, perhaps I can remove this from Peer Review.

By the way you are wrong.

Happy Nerd, you put this into peer review and I complimented it and made a suggestion. You immediately attacked me. That is not the best way to persuade a scout that this should be picked.

Rather than removing it from peer review, which would be a pity, I suggest you consider people's suggestions.

I apologise for being wrong. Please enlighten me and the others who have asked about this subject, by relating your five voting types to well-known system names.

Hi Happy Nerd.

Did you intend to post that earlier comment to Gnomon? - it doesn't seem to follow from what has gone before.

Yes, Icy, if you mean post 10, I did not post that inadvertently.

I asked Gnomon a question in post 3 in response to his question in post 2. He decided my post 3 was an attack, but I wasn’t to find that out until his post 11.

After my post 3, Gnomon could have asked, “Is that an attack or are you just glad to see me?" He could have asked, "Is that an attack or do you want an actual number?” He could have said, "That felt like an attack. Is that your intention?” But he did not.

So Icy, you want to know how post 10 follows from what went before. Gnomon made what I believe are non-helpful posts in the PR thread, and I got fed up with Gnomon.

Post 8 Gnomon says, "I'll leave that to you to decide, HN, once you've presented the figures.”

No, I don’t have to present any figures to Gnomon or include them in my entry.

Post 9 Gnomon says, ""Select One" is First past the post. "Ranked voting" is single transferable vote.”



Which bring us to my post 10.

Finally Gnomon finally says what’s eating him in post 11 - he felt attacked by what I said in post 3. Seriously? Gnomon do you really not know what an attack is? And even if you sincerely believe I did attack you, why not call me on it in your next post? Trust me, when I do attack, it won’t be subtle or couched in subtext. I have it on good authority I am completely devoid of subtext.

Let’s all be adults and say what is on our minds.

Here’s what’s on my mind:

Peer Review is not writing by committee. PR is about building the Guide and the writer’s chops. Peer Review should be about helping the writer to achieve the writer’s goal for an entry that’s a candidate for the Edited Guide. To me that means

1) I decide the purpose and message of each entry I write, including the piece’s focus, voice and content.

2) I decide what research I will do and how I will present it.

3) I should review each peer’s suggestion carefully, but I decide which suggestions to accept and how those suggestions should be incorporated.

I decide. Not Gnomon nor anybody else. Me.

If this is not acceptable, and it is my expectations that need changing, you should tell me now.

It looks like it's the word 'common' that started this disagreement off. Perhaps another word would be less contentious? How about 'known', so that the sentence reads:

'This entry compares the advantages and disadvantages of five known voting systems.'

This is, of course, just a suggestion.


Geggs

Hi HN - Thanks for explaining

I actually didn't read any of that in Gnomon's posts. I found his feedback to be clear and constructive.

I always welcome Gnomon's comments on an entry, as they're honest, direct and to the point. I find my entries are always improved as a result of his assistance, but if you feel that they didn't assist you on this occasion, then there is no reason you have to take them - simply thank him and say you'd prefer to leave it as it is. It only takes a scout to agree, and there's your guide entry recommended.

Ok, it appears that I misinterpreted your post 3 and you misinterpreted my reply to it. I thought your posting was a rather aggressive way of saying that you and not I should decide what is "common". This is so obvious that I assumed you were upset by my question.

Instead of replying that I thought you were attacking me, I chose to acknowledge that it was your decision.

I still feel that it is a flaw of this entry that it gives no indication of how common these systems are. It's the first thing that most readers would wonder about. This is a suggestion.

Good job, Icy, thanks.

Gnomon, so, okay. I get that you are pointing out what you see as a flaw with the entry, and that you feel attacked. Those are two separate problems, only one of which I plan on dealing with in this forum. If you have a problem with me, see me outside of this forum.

I have no problem with you. I just want to help make this entry as good as possible. But you are welcome to ignore my advice.

I'm also still interested to hear an explanation of which of your five systems corresponds to the voting systems that most people have heard of: first past the post and single transferable vote.

I'm very familiar with single transferable vote because it is the system we use here in the Republic of Ireland for all elections, whether there is a single position to be filled (eg Presidential election) or a number of seats in each constituency (eg vote for the Dail, our House of Representatives. This is exactly as you describe a Ranked Voting system.

I'm not familiar with "First Past the Post", but Wikipedia states that it is a system where the candidate with the most votes gets elected, so it seems to be a "Select One" system.

Can you please explain what I'm getting wrong here, and what deserved the facepalm?

I'll come see you, and no, I'm not upset.