Subcategories

• Voting Methods

  Single-winner

  Multi-winner
  85
  Topics
  832
  Posts

  

  @spelunker Is there anything in particular you need explained or clarified?

  While my current implementation is javascript, I didn't "write" it so much as prompted ChatGPT to write it, and since I did it very step by step, it should be easy to follow.

  Here is the chatGPT conversation: https://sharegpt.com/c/fyOiNHy
  It didn't make any mistakes, so it is pretty easy to follow, but I was careful in terms of prompting it to do one thing at a time.

  Here is the codepen: https://codepen.io/karmatics/pen/KKxeEEJ?editors=1010

  First I asked ChatGPT to parse ranked ballots and put them into a reasonable data structure. Then I had it so it could clone that data structure and remove a candidate (from the list of candidates as well as from the ballots), to allow for elimination.

  Then I made a function "doPlurality" to do a plurality calculation on that, and return the winner(s) in an array (in case of tie it can be more than one). Then I had that function be able to do it inverted, to find the plurality loser.

  Then I had it make a function "doIRV": to do an IRV tabulation on it, which in turn calls the "doPlurality" function multiple times, inverted so it picks the loser so that candidate can be eliminated. Then I made sure doIRV could be inverted itself.

  Finally, I made doIRV so it can recurse to a given depth, which means that, instead of calling doPlurality to find candidates to eliminate, it calls doIRV. (until it reaches the specified depth, when it will call doPlurality)

  I'm not sure what you are looking for as a formal definition, but if you need something else please let me know. It would be awesome if you were able to do some kind of proof.

• Philosophy

  Political Theory and economics

  Voting Theoretic Criteria

  Political Theory

  Economics

  Ethics
  32
  Topics
  216
  Posts

  

  Hi all,
  Sorry for the delay, but this thread was recently brought up again as an example so I'd like to post a comment addressing the Code of Conduct issues raised.

  Making the forum welcoming for new (and old) people is important. To that aim, we do have a code of conduct that can be helpful.

  It includes this: "Please make an effort to stay on topic and to not waste people's time. Keep in mind that this is a volunteer-driven project, and that time contributed by participants and moderators is appreciated and valued. Try to keep all discussions relevant to voting theory and reform efforts. Avoid sweeping generalizations or assumptions."

• New Voting Methods and Variations
  32
  Topics
  421
  Posts

  

  @marcus-ogren Good point. The idea behind the Critical Score is to boost candidates with isolated support. It's possible that it goes too far, as you've highlighted. I just found that to sort of achieve the effect I was looking for, I would need a really big exponent for the Power Score.

  I wonder how it all washes out in more realistic scenarios, but it's valid to consider someone putting themselves on the ballot and literally not telling anyone just to then score themselves 5 stars. Perhaps there's some kind of balancing that can be built in, but I suspect, on the general advice of James Quinn, that that would likely cause new problems.