News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on A “perfect” voting system. Parent comment

Re:A “perfect” voting system by JoachimSchipper on Tuesday April 26, 2011 @09:53AM (#2485153)
Can you explain why that wouldn't lead to the introduction of parties like Tories2, Tories3, ..., Tories100? One could allocate 1/#votes "points" to each party voted for, but that gets you back to strategic voting.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “perfect” voting system by leot on Tuesday April 26, 2011 @01:02PM (#2486135)
Every voter only gets one vote. Extra parties would change nothing.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “perfect” voting system by JoachimSchipper on Tuesday April 26, 2011 @03:21PM (#2486743)
That was my first idea, but the comment I'm replying to included

> This would remove a lot of tactical debate if you're vasting your vote on candidates/parties who don't have huge chances for success.

which doesn't work if you give each party 1/#number_of_parties_voted_for votes (voting for CoolGuy gives your vote on EstablishedAndNotTooBad less weight, after all.)

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:A “perfect” voting system by swombat on Tuesday April 26, 2011 @11:23AM (#2485594)
Creating a party and running it in an election is a tad more onerous than creating a Reddit account. You can't create 100 parties just to try to game the lottery.
[ Parent | on HN ]