= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
John_Maxwell_IV comments on Open thread, 9-15 June 2014 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (239)
It seems like it would solve US 3rd party voting issues, e.g. if I prefer Libertarians to Democrats to Republicans, I could give the Libertarian candidate 10/10, the Democratic candidate 10/10, and the Republican candidate 0/10.
You'd presumably plan to do that so long as the Republican was in first or second place, but if polling started to show the Republican candidate in third place, you'd want to switch the Democratic candidate's score down to 0.
In the end, range voting boils down to approval voting, but with a trick to penalize people who are bad at math; and approval voting itself penalizes people who don't closely follow election polling.
On the other hand, I'm not sure that voting weights based on mathematical aptitude and knowledge of current events are necessarily bad things, and even if they were they're still probably not nearly as bad as the hysteresis effects of plurality voting.
It would absolutely be an improvement on the current system, no argument there.