63
submitted 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) by 001100010010@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

Which of these options are you favorites? Rank up to 5 options:

https://www.rcv123.org/ballot/9T1G8AJZDeRPZiWJwWaKsB

You may also answer and discuss here, but only the votes in the link is counted for the purposes of this survey.

Why am I doing this? Because I missed the polls from [the website that shall not be named], so I wanted to experiment a bit here. And what better way to do polls than the best way! I hereby present you to the Ranked Choice Ballot! Ta-da! (Please go vote, I spent a lot of time on this)

Edit: If you don't want to vote, here are the results from all the votes so far:

https://www.rcv123.org/results/9T1G8AJZDeRPZiWJwWaKsB

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 9 points 1 year ago

Ranked choice is probably the worst option for a poll like this...

I'm betting if you ran this exact poll under different rules, say multiple choice allowing unlimited selection, you'd get a vastly different answer.

This is because Ranked Choice is a horrible voting system. If First Past the Post wasn't so bad, RCV would have the title of worst system ever created.

Hell, the site you linked even has a "pros and cons" section where they even admit to the massive problems with the system but then hand wave them away.

Ballot exhaustion alone is a showstopper. They pretend that the voter "just didn't choose someone popular enough to win" when the reality is much more insidious. The most common form of ballot exhaustion is when your 2nd or 3rd choice is eliminated in the first round, and then your 1st choice is eliminated in a later round.

And because of how votes are counted, if you had put your 2nd choice in the 1st slot, they could have won the election, even if they were not your literal favorite.

Up to 20% of ballots cast in RCV elections are thrown out due to ballot exhaustion. That's enough votes to massively shift who wins or loses.


The basic truth here is that RCV is good at one thing. Preventing fringe candidates from spoiling an election between two front-runners. It can prevent another Bush v Gore, but that's it.

Also, in real world use, it's fucked up several elections.

Due to the need for centralized counting, the 2021 NYC mayoral race had 130,000 extra votes that turned out to have been test ballots that should never have been in the same location as the actual election ballots.

https://www.thecity.nyc/2021/6/29/22556830/nyc-board-of-election-pulls-preliminary-mayoral-results

Centralize counting and an overly complex system also resulted in the wrong winner being chosen in California. The wrong winner was sworn in and served in the position for a full month before the error was found.

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Alameda-County-admits-tallying-error-in-17682520.php


There are vastly better options than RCV.

You can read up on them here. https://www.starvoting.org/

And here, https://electionscience.org/

[-] fearout@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

So if you were to choose the best system for multi-candidate voting that would work for most real-life elections or multiple-choice rankings, which one would it be?

[-] chaogomu@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Absolute best would be STAR.

https://www.starvoting.org/

A good runner-up would be Approval.

https://electionscience.org/

[-] TooL@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago

Came here to take a silly poll about drinks, came away with some actual interesting reading about better election methods. Thanks man. A shame this will never change in the US but one can dream..

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (11 replies)
this post was submitted on 13 Jul 2023
63 points (89.9% liked)

Asklemmy

43852 readers
676 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS