|
Later-no-harm Criterion
The later-no-harm criterion is a voting system criterion formulated by Douglas Woodall. Woodall defined the criterion as " ding a later preference to a ballot should not harm any candidate already listed." For example, a ranked voting method in which a voter adding a 3rd preference could reduce the likelihood of their 1st preference being selected, fails later-no-harm. Voting systems that fail the later-no-harm criterion are vulnerable to the tactical voting strategies called bullet voting and burying, which can deny victory to a sincere Condorcet winner. However, the fact that all cardinal voting methods fail the later-no-harm criterion is essential to their favoring consensus options (broad, moderate support) over majoritarian options (narrow, strong support). Complying methods Two-round system, Single transferable vote, Instant Runoff Voting, Contingent vote, Minimax Condorcet (a pairwise opposition variant which does not satisfy the Condorcet Criterion), and Descending S ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Two-round System
The two-round system (TRS), also known as runoff voting, second ballot, or ballotage, is a voting method used to elect a single candidate, where voters cast a single vote for their preferred candidate. It generally ensures a majoritarian result, not a simple plurality result as under First past the post. Under the two-round election system, the election process usually proceeds to a second round only if in the first round no candidate received a simple majority (more than 50%) of votes cast, or some other lower prescribed percentage. Under the two-round system, usually only the two candidates who received the most votes in the first round, or only those candidates who received above a prescribed proportion of the votes, are candidates in the second round. Other candidates are excluded from the second round. The two-round system is widely used in the election of legislative bodies and directly elected presidents, as well as in other contexts, such as in the election of politica ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ranked Voting
The term ranked voting (also known as preferential voting or ranked choice voting) refers to any voting system in which voters ranking, rank their candidates (or options) in a sequence of first or second (or third, etc.) on their respective ballots. Ranked voting systems differ on the basis of how the ballots are marked, how the preferences are tabulated and counted, how many seats are filled, and whether voters are allowed to rank candidates equally. An electoral system that uses ranked voting uses one of the many available counting methods to select the winning candidate or candidates. There is also variation among ranked voting electoral systems in that in some ranked voting systems, officials require voters to rank a set number of candidates, sometimes all of them; in others, citizens may rank as many candidates as they see fit. Election of single members using ranked votes is often instant-runoff voting. Election of multiple members using ranked votes is usually single tr ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Ranked Pairs
Ranked pairs (sometimes abbreviated "RP") or the Tideman method is an electoral system developed in 1987 by Nicolaus Tideman that selects a single winner using votes that express preferences. The ranked-pairs procedure can also be used to create a sorted list of winners. If there is a candidate who is preferred over the other candidates, when compared in turn with each of the others, the ranked-pairs procedure guarantees that candidate will win. Because of this property, the ranked-pairs procedure complies with the Condorcet winner criterion (and is a Condorcet method). Procedure The ranked-pairs procedure operates as follows: # Tally the vote count comparing each pair of candidates, and determine the winner of each pair (provided there is not a tie) # Sort (rank) each pair, by strength of victory, from largest first to smallest last.In fact, there are different ways how the ''strength of a victory'' is measured. This article uses Tideman's original method based on margins of ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Bucklin Voting
Bucklin voting is a class of voting methods that can be used for single-member and multi-member districts. As in highest median rules like the majority judgment, the Bucklin winner will be one of the candidates with the highest median ranking or rating. It is named after its original promoter, the Georgist politician James W. Bucklin of Grand Junction, Colorado, and is also known as the Grand Junction system. Voting process Bucklin rules varied, but here is a typical example: Voters are allowed rank preference ballots (first, second, third, etc.). First choice votes are first counted. If one candidate has a majority, that candidate wins. Otherwise the second choices are added to the first choices. Again, if a candidate with a majority vote is found, the winner is the candidate with the most votes accumulated. Lower rankings are added as needed. A majority is determined based on the number of valid ballots. Since, after the first round, there may be more votes cast than vo ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Majority Judgment
Majority judgment (MJ) is a single-winner voting system proposed in 2007 by Michel Balinski and Rida Laraki. It is a highest median rule, i.e., a cardinal voting system that elects the candidate with the highest median rating. Unlike other voting methods, MJ guarantees that the winner between three or more candidates will be the candidate who had received an absolute majority of the highest grades given by all the voters. Voting process Voters grade as many of the candidates' as they wish with regard to their suitability for office as either Excellent (ideal), Very Good, Good, Acceptable, Poor, or Reject. Multiple candidates may be given the same grade by a voter. The candidate with the highest median grade is the winner. This median-grade can be found as follows: Place all the grades, high to low, top to bottom, in side-by-side columns, the name of each candidate at the top of each of these columns. The median-grade for each candidate is the grade located halfway down eac ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Score Voting
Score voting or range voting is an electoral system for single-seat elections, in which voters give each candidate a score, the scores are added (or averaged), and the candidate with the highest total is elected. It has been described by various other names including evaluative voting, utilitarian voting, interval measure voting, the point system, ratings summation, 0-99 voting, average voting and utility voting. It is a type of cardinal voting electoral system, and aims to implement the utilitarian social choice rule. Score voting should be distinguished from positional voting systems, such as the Borda count: in score voting, each voter is free to give any score to any candidate; in positional voting, the score that each voter gives to each candidate is uniquely determined by the candidate's rank in the voter's ballot. Usage Political use Combined approval voting, a 3-rank form of score voting, is used to determine which candidates represent the parties in Latvia's Saei ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Plurality Voting System
Plurality voting refers to electoral systems in which a candidate, or candidates, who poll more than any other counterpart (that is, receive a plurality), are elected. In systems based on single-member districts, it elects just one member per district and may also be referred to as first-past-the-post (FPTP), single-member plurality (SMP/SMDP), single-choice voting (an imprecise term as non-plurality voting systems may also use a single choice), simple plurality or relative majority (as opposed to an ''absolute majorit''y, where more than half of votes is needed, this is called ''majority voting''). A system which elects multiple winners elected at once with the plurality rule, such as one based on multi-seat districts, is referred to as plurality block voting. Plurality voting is distinguished from ''majority voting'', in which a winning candidate must receive an absolute majority of votes: more than half of all votes (more than all other candidates combined if each voter ha ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Descending Acquiescing Coalitions
The discography of the experimental music group Psychic TV consists of over 100 full-length albums, over 15 compilation albums and over 30 singles and EPs. Studio albums *'' Force the Hand of Chance'' (LP, cassette) (1982) *'' Themes'' (LP) (1982) *''Dreams Less Sweet'' (LP, cassette) (1983) *'' Pagan Day'' (LP, 12" picture disc) (1984) *''Those Who Do Not'' (2x12") (1984) *''Descending'' (1984) *''Mouth of the Night'' (CD, LP, 12" picture disc) (1985) *'' Themes 2'' (LP) (1985) *''Themes 3'' (LP) (1986) *''The Magickal Mystery D Tour EP'' (1986) *''Allegory and Self'' (CD, LP, 12" picture disc) (1988) *'' Jack the Tab – Acid Tablets Volume One'' (CD, LP, 12" picture disc) (1988) *'' Tekno Acid Beat'' (CD, LP) (1988) *''Kondole'' (CD) (1989) *''At Stockholm (CD) (1990)'' *'' Jack the Tab/Tekno Acid Beat'' (2xCD, 2X12") (1990) *''Towards Thee Infinite Beat'' (CD, 12", cassette) (1990) *''Beyond Thee Infinite Beat'' (CD, 2x12", cassette) (1990) *''Direction ov Travel'' (CD) (1991 ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Minimax Condorcet
In voting systems, the Minimax Condorcet method (often referred to as "the Minimax method") is one of several Condorcet methods used for tabulating votes and determining a winner when using ranked voting in a single-winner election. It is sometimes referred to as the Simpson–Kramer method, and the successive reversal method. Minimax selects as the winner the candidate whose greatest pairwise defeat is smaller than the greatest pairwise defeat of any other candidate: or, put another way, "the only candidate whose support never drops below percent" in any pairwise contest. Description of the method The Minimax Condorcet method selects the candidate for whom the greatest pairwise score for another candidate against him or her is the least such score among all candidates. Formal definition Formally, let \operatorname(X,Y) denote the pairwise score for X against Y. Then the candidate, W selected by minimax (aka the winner) is given by: : W = \arg \min_X \left( \max_Y \operator ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Instant Runoff Voting
Instant-runoff voting (IRV) is a type of ranked preferential voting method. It uses a majority voting rule in single-winner elections where there are more than two candidates. It is commonly referred to as ranked-choice voting (RCV) in the United States (although there are other forms of ranked voting), preferential voting in Australia, where it has seen the widest adoption; in the United Kingdom, it is generally called alternative vote (AV), whereas in some other countries it is referred to as the single transferable vote, which usually means only its multi-winner variant. All these names are often used inconsistently. Voters in IRV elections rank the candidates in order of preference. Ballots are initially counted for each voter's top choice. If a candidate has more than half of the first-choice votes, that candidate wins. If not, then the candidate with the fewest votes is eliminated, and the voters who selected the defeated candidate as a first choice then have their vote ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Cardinal Voting
Cardinal voting refers to any electoral system which allows the voter to give each candidate an independent evaluation, typically a rating or grade. These are also referred to as "rated" (ratings ballot), "evaluative", "graded", or "absolute" voting systems. ''Cardinal'' methods (based on cardinal utility) and '' ordinal methods'' (based on '' ordinal utility'') are two main categories of modern voting systems, along with plurality voting. Variants There are several voting systems that allow independent ratings of each candidate. For example: * Approval voting (AV) is the simplest possible method, which allows only the two grades (0, 1): "approved" or "unapproved". * Evaluative voting (EV) or combined approval voting (CAV) uses 3 grades (−1, 0, +1): "against", "abstain", or "for". * Score voting or range voting, in which ratings are numerical and the candidate with the highest ''average'' (or total) rating wins. ** Score voting uses a discrete integer scale, typic ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
Condorcet Winner
An electoral system satisfies the Condorcet winner criterion () if it always chooses the Condorcet winner when one exists. The candidate who wins a majority of the vote in every head-to-head election against each of the other candidatesthat is, a candidate preferred by more voters than any othersis the Condorcet winner, although Condorcet winners do not exist in all cases. It is sometimes simply referred to as the "Condorcet criterion", though it is very different from the "Condorcet loser criterion". Any voting method conforming to the Condorcet winner criterion is known as a Condorcet method. The Condorcet winner is the person who would win a two-candidate election against each of the other candidates in a plurality vote. For a set of candidates, the Condorcet winner is always the same regardless of the voting system in question, and can be discovered by using pairwise counting on voters' ranked preferences. A Condorcet winner will not always exist in a given set of votes, which ... [...More Info...] [...Related Items...] OR: [Wikipedia] [Google] [Baidu] |
