STV again (was Re: PEP 308 vote type (was Re: Update to PEP308: if-then-else expression))

[Bengt Richter]

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:48:21 -0800, Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> wrote:

>Terry Reedy wrote:
>
>> Here is a 'do both' compromise.  List alternatives A, B, C, ... with
>> 'do-nothing' at top or bottom.  Voting instruction: list alternatives
>> in order of preference, and use a vertical bar '|' to separate
>> acceptable from unacceptable alternatives.  Example: CA|BD.  Then the
>> votes could be analyzed both as preference votes and and approval
>> votes.  (Python makes this pretty simple to do 8-).  Given that the
>> vote is advisory, multiple analyses are acceptible, even with varying
>> results.
>
>There's another issue here which nobody has yet addressed.  If you're
>going to hold a public vote, it should be pretty straightforward to
>understand how to do it.  If the voting process itself requires five
>paragraphs description, I think you're talking about a bad voting
>process.
>
>Approval voting has the benefit of being very simple to explain: 
>"Select as many or as few as you want."
>
Ok, just let approval values vary from -1 to +1 ;-)

Keep in mind, we are doing this to communicate with the BDFL,
not to present him with a predigested decision run through some
formula. Why not make specific-choice disapproval visible?

Regards,
Bengt Richter