Say in the elections, 3 candidates were available: a,b and c
How ofter did the situation happen that you did not care a or b to make it, but did definitely not want c to make it?
So what could you have done with the current polling-system? You maybe voted a. So a maybe got 20 votes (cause everybody did and thought like you) and c got 1 vote (his own propably). a would be the leader and c the deputy.
Would this be right? All voters would have liked b in the position of deputy instead of c.
How could we help this situation?
With multiple choice polls for elections. In the situation above, all 20 voters would have voted a+b, but not c , so the result would have been 20a 20b and 1c, which would lead to a a/b vote making one of them leader and one deputy.
If you wanted to really insist on a, so you could also have given only 1 vote of course.

This is an informational poll only. Just because this topic came up so ofter in personal chats and pms.
It will be up for 7 days, till Tuesday.
You can also Abstain, of yourse and always state your opinion below.

well, i first posted the poll as multiple choice accidentially, but after i wanted to pm DOM to change it, i suddenly changed my mind ;-)
this is a nice example for a multiple choice poll now, even if it makes no sense (well, at least voting yes+no doesnt seem to make sense to me. maybe someone thinks different). so i left it as it is.

I'd get it changed from multi-choice, Dis. This is a yes/no poll with an abstain option. There's never a case where choosing multiples is valid.

I definitely support using the multi selection option for election polls. This option makes sure that the candidate that the most people feel comfortable with will win.

Here's another example that I've used before. There are three candidates, Andy, Beth and Charles. Of the twenty voters, 10 would be comfortable with either Andy or Beth but despise Charles. The other 10 would be happy with Beth or Charles but think Andy is a dope. In a single choice poll anybody could win it but there's a 2/3 chance that half of the people will be very unhappy. in a multi-choice poll, Beth will win and everybody will be happy.

Darn, and I wanted to have some fun with this poll...

EDIT: This was post 666 for me and I saw it change to post 667. Is that a sign?

Seriously, the ONLY time I see the need for multiple choice polls is when you really need multiple answers. If you're going to elect one person to a post, you don't need multiple choice polls. You are asking for unwanted and unneeded complications and abuse. Originally I like the idea for its uniqueness. I thought it would help us break away from the mundane. But now I see it as a problem. Maybe I'm wrong again...

If there's only one job they are running for then we should only be allowed to pick one person for the job. We vote for someone in an election not against someone! And what if I only like one of the three candidates? If I only vote for one and most everyone else vote for two, does my vote carry the same weight as everyone else's?
I think it would be more productive to let citizens run for only one office at a time rather than two.

It's not voting against someone, it's voting for everybody you would like to see in the position. If you vote for only one candidate and everyone else votes for two then your vote actually carries more weight.

Originally posted by Cyc
You are asking for unwanted and unneeded complications and abuse.
What complications or abuse could result from using multiple choices in an election?

Originally posted by donsig
If there's only one job they are running for then we should only be allowed to pick one person for the job. We vote for someone in an election not against someone! And what if I only like one of the three candidates? If I only vote for one and most everyone else vote for two, does my vote carry the same weight as everyone else's?


This is my opinion as well. Multiple choice poll should be used in some cases, but certainly not in elections.

Abstain. The multiple choice of this poll is ridiculous :) . How can someone vote yes and no at the same time?

That said, I agree with Donsig. Furthermore, no poll for my RL govt works like this. Elections are held for the citizen you want to lead, not citizens.

Borda count may work, we rank everyone and score is awarded for that, like first gains 5, second 3 and last 1, but it would still be very complicated, the system we have seems good enough.

chiefpaco:
normaly you vote a party and they select the leader. thats how "democraties" work today.
we want to be better ;-)

curufinwe:
i dont get your point here. if you vote for 2 ppl, each gets a increased vote-count. the highest wins, the second is second. like now. no more complications. if 2 are equal, a tie-breaking vote is initiated (this should be a normal poll, of course), like now.


abuse:
i dont see it. help me to see a possible abuse!

to voting in general:
i did not mean to use it in general, just for elections.

voting in elections:
would it help to get multiple choice only if more than 2 candidates are there? abstain should be left out then, of course.
benefit of it:
a secondary option of your vote is possible. so if you like 2 candidates, the election will tune better for your real opinion (see example in 1st post).

Let me tell a story.

Once upon a time, a remote city in the empire was going to hold the election for its mayor. There was 3 candidates in the election. Candidate A and candidate B were both very popular, while candidate C couldn't even get 1% of support from the population. According to the local law, each citizen have 2 votes, and the runner-up of the election would be the deputy mayor. Candidate A and candidate B held opposite views, and their supporters were hostile towards each other and certainly not happy if their arch-rival become the deputy mayor . In the election, people supporting A voted A+C, while people supporting B voted B+C. In the end, it was C, the unpopular candidate, who won the election.

------extracted from Ancient Phoenatican Mathematics

skywind: they could also have voted only for their candidate. the A's for a and the B's for b.

Why would they vote for C? If they did, it was their will that he won, as he was the least-conflicting nominee.

If i would like to continue this, there would be 1000s of examples bringing all possible ways to vote to nonsense. So where is your point Skywind?

Originally posted by disorganizer
If i would like to continue this, there would be 1000s of examples bringing all possible ways to vote to nonsense. So where is your point Skywind?

I agree with you disorganizer. So why is it better to change to giving citizens more than one vote in an election?

well,
i could have stated my example, but this would have been the same category. i still find it more realistic though. you normally vote for ppl you like, not for ppl you dont like.

You vote for the person you want in office. If someone else gets there, at least you can say it's not your fault. :)

I voted No, BTW.