Fairvote extends an olive branch


#1


While there are key distinctions separating STAR and approval voting systems from ranked choice voting, they all demonstrate voters’ hunger for elections in which all voices and viewpoints matter and outcomes that protect majority rule.

And that’s a goal we can all get behind.

Neat. I wonder what brought this on – perhaps AV in Fargo, and now they’re realizing there’s a real demand for a cardinal voting system.

Let’s do what we can to keep this going.


#2

I think you meant to link to this one:


#3

Close. Try:

outcomes that protect utilitarian rule.

… That would exclude IRV though, so they’re obviously not going to write that. Outcomes that protect utilitarian OR majority rule? Perhaps they should of just left it at:

While there are key distinctions separating STAR and approval voting systems from ranked choice voting, they all demonstrate voters’ hunger for elections in which all voices and viewpoints matter.

And that’s a goal we can all get behind.


#4

I’ve done simulations of many different multi winner tally systems and by far the most important part, whether its ranked, score, or what have you, is transfering of surplus votes, and second place is transfering of otherwise wasted votes (deficit votes).

Compared to that, everything else is more or less a detail.


#5

Which is something that Asset does better than STV if you assume that candidates have similar preferences to the bulk of their voters.


#6

That’s a pretty big assumption, isn’t it? One that seems to go contrary to extant evidence