I like Majority Judgement, which is like range voting except instead of sorting candidates by the sum of the scores each of them gets, you use the median of the scores. IIUC it’s been proven that it’s the system where tactical voting is hardest (for a certain definition of “hardest”).
It seems to me like it’ll essentially be approval voting with the ability to give half a point of approval. There will be no distinction between ‘Excellent’ and ‘Good’. What are the chances that two parties would make it up to ‘good’ median rating in an election, anyway? Maybe that’s just the present-day US, but I have a hard time seeing people being that happy with politics.
But if they are, then there’s suddenly no distinction between ‘fair’ and ‘poor’. It’s like since I don’t like either of them I’m not allowed an opinion between them. I’ll take Nixon over Hitler, please!
I like Majority Judgement, which is like range voting except instead of sorting candidates by the sum of the scores each of them gets, you use the median of the scores. IIUC it’s been proven that it’s the system where tactical voting is hardest (for a certain definition of “hardest”).
Majority Judgement link is dead.
Fixed (both by changing the URL in the parent, and by creating a redirect on Wikipedia from the spelling with the E to the spelling without it).
I hadn’t encountered this one before.
It seems to me like it’ll essentially be approval voting with the ability to give half a point of approval. There will be no distinction between ‘Excellent’ and ‘Good’. What are the chances that two parties would make it up to ‘good’ median rating in an election, anyway? Maybe that’s just the present-day US, but I have a hard time seeing people being that happy with politics.
But if they are, then there’s suddenly no distinction between ‘fair’ and ‘poor’. It’s like since I don’t like either of them I’m not allowed an opinion between them. I’ll take Nixon over Hitler, please!
I also like Majority Judgment.