... and the "shooting oneself in the foot" result of trying to vote "strategically" is the main argument I've heard against trying it out: the idea that we'd end up with someone that nobody wanted. However, that'd be a heck of a lot of people attempting to stick it to the enemy, and I can't believe that there'd be enough people trying for it to sway the vote significantly Or perhaps it's just that I'm not brave enough with my vote to pull that sort of thing, no matter how meaningless some say my vote may be.
The number of "points" is equal to the number of candidates. Got it.
Can distribute "points" however you want. Got it. Thanks.
Despite criticism, I'm in favor of the idea just because it'd be the start of chance. Even if we didn't stick with ranked voting, it'd be progress, at least.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Actually, it's a suggestion I've heard before ...
Date: 2004-10-18 09:47 pm (UTC)The number of "points" is equal to the number of candidates. Got it.
Can distribute "points" however you want. Got it. Thanks.
Despite criticism, I'm in favor of the idea just because it'd be the start of chance. Even if we didn't stick with ranked voting, it'd be progress, at least.