Jan 1, 2013 04:48 PM
(This post was last modified: Jan 2, 2013 10:12 AM by Tutelary.)
The following suggestion has been modified. Text that has been crossed out is no longer relevant. Original Title: Change MOTM Voting System to Single Transferable Voting
Right now, the MOTM current Hackforums voting system is ran under First Past the Post. This is a terribly flawed voting system and should be changed.
Why it is wrong
Here's a Youtube video explaining why it is wrong:
Author is CGPGrey
If you do not want to watch the video, then I will explain the problems with this particular voting system here, paraphrased from the video:
First, the system is simple, one vote per person, person with the most votes wins. Pretty simple, right? Absolutely. Terribly flawed? Absolutely true. To see why it's flawed, we can just take a look at one of the voting months, in this case, November 2012, look at the following image from MOTM elections:
Spoiler (Click to View)
Adampelletgun won, but only with 22.8% of the vote, leaving 77.2% of people voting for somebody else. That, my friends, is a very flawed voting system. But imagine if there were A LOT more candidates, he might've only gotten 10 or 8 percent, but still won. This is minority rule; the majority of people wanted somebody else, but he still won. This can be seen in other MOTM voting months, not just November. The rest of the video just explains what else can happen; gerrymandering and a two party system, I don't think this will happen to HF since we're not running a country here, just voting to give somebody some award. Though this is still a problem for countries who still use First Past the Post, like the United States. That's not the point of this thread, though. I'd like to have the ability for users to use Single Transferable Voting for polls, while still having the option to use First Past the Post. (Though it would be discouraged.)
How we can fix improve it
Right now, I think of only one solution: Single Transferable Voting
It is explained in the following Youtube video.
Author is uwesuvideo.
Again, I will paraphrase the video to text here: Each person gets several votes, marking their candidates in order of preference. If one person gets more than half the votes right off the bat, that person gets the award. But if there is no clear winner, the candidate with the least amount of votes gets eliminated. In First Past the Post, the person who voted for the losing candidate basically wasted their vote. Using Single Transferable Voting, if you voted for the losing candidate, that candidate is eliminated and your vote gets transferred to your second vote. If there is a majority at this point, that candidate wins the award. If not, it continues until a candidate receives the majority. This system is fair and logical since
This could be very useful in the MOTM awards, though I've realized and been told by members that it's basically a "Popularity Contest", so this suggestion has been modified to account for ALL HF polls. (People will still have the option to use First Past the Post)
But wait, what about the people who have already been given the award?
It will not be taken away or the user penalized for not having won the award in this system.
Implementation
I admit, Omniscient would have to write up entirely new code to establish the voting system in this way, though it would make it a lot more fair in MOTM elections. general users' polls. Of course, any implementation of this is entirely up to him.
Flaws
I admit, this system does have some flaws: For example, if the person doesn't care enough to vote in their order of preference and just pick random candidates polls to do so, they could sway the election. Though this is also true with First Past the Post. People could just select somebody just to select somebody. As well, if the voter doesn't select enough candidates choices in the poll in order of preference, the people who did are able to influence the election. This is not the problem with the system itself, but with the voter. One last flaw: Since this system will keep eliminating the candidate option with the least votes, the number of "votes" a person has is the same number of candidates choices.
Conclusion
Changing the HF voting system will allow for actual majority rule, candidates will try to appeal to more people, and if a person is not favorable to as many people, they will lose their chance at the award.
If anybody has any questions or concerns and would like for me to address them on this thread, please don't hesitate to PM me.
Right now, the MOTM current Hackforums voting system is ran under First Past the Post. This is a terribly flawed voting system and should be changed.
Why it is wrong
Here's a Youtube video explaining why it is wrong:
Author is CGPGrey
If you do not want to watch the video, then I will explain the problems with this particular voting system here, paraphrased from the video:
First, the system is simple, one vote per person, person with the most votes wins. Pretty simple, right? Absolutely. Terribly flawed? Absolutely true. To see why it's flawed, we can just take a look at one of the voting months, in this case, November 2012, look at the following image from MOTM elections:
Spoiler (Click to View)
![[Image: 61763511ce63ede9753846cc6df93dec.png]](https://gyazo.com/61763511ce63ede9753846cc6df93dec.png)
Adampelletgun won, but only with 22.8% of the vote, leaving 77.2% of people voting for somebody else. That, my friends, is a very flawed voting system. But imagine if there were A LOT more candidates, he might've only gotten 10 or 8 percent, but still won. This is minority rule; the majority of people wanted somebody else, but he still won. This can be seen in other MOTM voting months, not just November. The rest of the video just explains what else can happen; gerrymandering and a two party system, I don't think this will happen to HF since we're not running a country here, just voting to give somebody some award. Though this is still a problem for countries who still use First Past the Post, like the United States. That's not the point of this thread, though. I'd like to have the ability for users to use Single Transferable Voting for polls, while still having the option to use First Past the Post. (Though it would be discouraged.)
How we can fix improve it
Right now, I think of only one solution: Single Transferable Voting
It is explained in the following Youtube video.
Author is uwesuvideo.
Again, I will paraphrase the video to text here: Each person gets several votes, marking their candidates in order of preference. If one person gets more than half the votes right off the bat, that person gets the award. But if there is no clear winner, the candidate with the least amount of votes gets eliminated. In First Past the Post, the person who voted for the losing candidate basically wasted their vote. Using Single Transferable Voting, if you voted for the losing candidate, that candidate is eliminated and your vote gets transferred to your second vote. If there is a majority at this point, that candidate wins the award. If not, it continues until a candidate receives the majority. This system is fair and logical since
- No person wastes their vote.
- Candidates have to be favorable to all voters.
- Majority actually rules.
This could be very useful in the MOTM awards, though I've realized and been told by members that it's basically a "Popularity Contest", so this suggestion has been modified to account for ALL HF polls. (People will still have the option to use First Past the Post)
But wait, what about the people who have already been given the award?
It will not be taken away or the user penalized for not having won the award in this system.
Implementation
I admit, Omniscient would have to write up entirely new code to establish the voting system in this way, though it would make it a lot more fair in MOTM elections. general users' polls. Of course, any implementation of this is entirely up to him.
Flaws
I admit, this system does have some flaws: For example, if the person doesn't care enough to vote in their order of preference and just pick random candidates polls to do so, they could sway the election. Though this is also true with First Past the Post. People could just select somebody just to select somebody. As well, if the voter doesn't select enough candidates choices in the poll in order of preference, the people who did are able to influence the election. This is not the problem with the system itself, but with the voter. One last flaw: Since this system will keep eliminating the candidate option with the least votes, the number of "votes" a person has is the same number of candidates choices.
Conclusion
Changing the HF voting system will allow for actual majority rule, candidates will try to appeal to more people, and if a person is not favorable to as many people, they will lose their chance at the award.
If anybody has any questions or concerns and would like for me to address them on this thread, please don't hesitate to PM me.
![[Image: Y0PRYwG.png]](https://i.imgur.com/Y0PRYwG.png)