Shane Rush [shane(_at_)red(_dot_)nymcity(_dot_)com] wrote:
I am very much against this idea, though I understand a desire by some
to make changes to produce solid results. My initial thought is that
the last thing that is needed is 'complex tallying process' -
simplicity and an open understandable tally means that like the first
vote everyone can check their own vote and do a tally themselves -
even if/when next time the origin of each vote is aliased.
Don't mix up concepts, please. Complexity doesn't necessarily contradict
openness. Besides Condorcet voting isn't really that complex. You can
even do the tallying of a Condorcet vote using a pen and a sheet of paper.
It's not rocket science.
The fact that conventional voting methods are even simpler than Condorcet
voting is the very reason for them being flawed. Please read the
Wikipedia articles I referred to, they're really not that long.
I obviously need to do some proper research for Condorcet but a quick
back of envelope test shows me that while Condorcet voting may be
strategy-free for a large constituency when it comes to the small number
of votes being cast here then strategy is instead magnified.
I am not aware of such a problem. Could you please elaborate? Even if
that was the case, to the best of my knowledge other voting methods have
even bigger flaws when dealing with a small number of votes (cf. Mark
Shewmaker's latest posting on the topic).
When I voted I was very happy to give equal weight to each candidate
<each candidate will have an equal vote in council, OK> [...]
You can rank options equally with Condorcet voting. But in the vast
majority of cases that's not what informed voters want. Ranking
candidates for council membership differently doesn't imply giving them
different legitimacy. No governmental represantative system on earth that
I am aware of assigns less weight to electees who received less (or lower
ranked) votes.
however with a weighted <ranking whole number> vote it appears to me
that only about 10 voters could be needed to work together to stuff the
council with their top five choices and get a majority installed. IMO
ranking should only ever be used for resolving a tiebreak.
I think this fear is unjustified. Please give an example if you really
think otherwise.
The ability for candidates and voters to do their own check and tally
with aliased vote is top of my list.
Then Condorcet voting should pose no problem for you.
Julian Mehnle,
SPF Council Member.