New Thing! "To Build A Better Ballot"
Added 2016-12-11 17:26:26 +0000 UTCAn interactive guide to alternative voting systems
PLAY IT HERE: http://ncase.me/ballot (~25 min to play/read)
Thank you again for all your support, feedback, and patience as I finally friggin' finish this project! If you picked the $2+ reward, your name is credited at the bottom. If you picked the $10+ reward and replied to my email, your custom-drawn character is down there, too! If I missed you or you didn't get that email – sorry, Patreon is still a bit glitchy – please let me know in the comments below, or email me at n -AT- ncase -DOT- me.
Whoo, two big projects in two months, not too shabby. Nooooot too shabby.
And I'm looking forward – in the coming year – to making a lot more projects, that help make sense of our world that's getting ever-more complex and chaotic. Happy holidays, and nuzzle up with your loved ones for the New Year. Brace yourselves. 2017 is coming.
<3,
~ Nicky Case
Comments
Hi Nicky. I hope you continue our email discussion here and continue to explore muxive. I learned a lot from this ballot article. Instead of thinking about muxive as a ne type of voting tool to elect officials into important government positions - instead think of it as a solution to eliminate government leadership all together. We do not need to have human reps any longer. Technology now gives us the tools to self govern, and this is what muxive is looking to usher into the world. Muxive focuses on getting the honest citizens of the world to do the good governance work themselves. As soon as the voting shifts to Priority Thought Lists (PTLs) instead of political candidates those glitches you speak of diminish or even disappear. When PTLs include any logical possibility with 100s or 1000s of options to prioritize - this vote glitch analysis no longer applies. The strategizing goes away and the glitches go away. I'd love the opportunity to explain more and to get your assessment. Maybe start with that community flag example I pitched to you. Understanding how this works to keep everyone happy and engaged in a new collaboration world I think will speak volumes. Anyway thank. I love your approach to explaining solutions.
Joe Shumaker
2017-03-27 12:17:43 +0000 UTCThanks Ben! Also, the other reason I didn't cover electoral college is because (almost) *everyone* was talking about it post-election! Better late than never, I guess. Meanwhile, I didn't see much talk about voting systems themselves. Also, that sim is a cool illustration of IRV's "non-monotonic" wackiness! I've added your sim to the list at the bottom of <a href="http://ncase.me/ballot/sandbox" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">http://ncase.me/ballot/sandbox</a> :)
Nicky Case
2016-12-13 16:03:43 +0000 UTCThanks for the response, and for the explanation. I understand your desire to avoid a topic that is difficult to talk about in a bipartisan way. To me, it is frustrating to see avoidance of super important issues for the sole reason that there is politics happening around the issue, but I suppose I can agree with you that the best time to talk about those things is probably not the months immediately surrounding an election, even if I do personally believe it's a more important issue. However, are you familiar with the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact? Potentially a more achievable solution to the proportional representation problem than the whole basically-out-of-reach constitutional amendment thing <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Popular_Vote_Interstate_Compact</a>Not sure you could really make any interactive media with it or anything though, haha... EDIT: also I realized I didn't mention that I did in fact find this project engaging and informative! It was a bit more dense than your past work but also gave a whole new level of depth to something I had previously thought to be a simple binary (FPTP vs RCV) EDIT2: I made a sandbox of what I think is a pretty strong case against IRV: <a href="http://ncase.me/ballot/sandbox?m=%7B%22s%22%3A%22IRV%22%2C%22v%22%3A%5B%5B150%2C150%5D%5D%2C%22c%22%3A%5B%5B194%2C160%5D%2C%5B151%2C105%5D%2C%5B151%2C198%5D%2C%5B109%2C156%5D%2C%5B151%2C154%5D%5D%2C%22d%22%3A%22%5Btype%20a%20description%20for%20your%20model%20here.%20for%20example...%5D%5Cn%5CnLook%2C%20it's%20the%20whole%20shape%20gang!%20Steven%20Square%2C%20Tracy%20Triangle%2C%20Henry%20Hexagon%2C%20Percival%20Pentagon%2C%20and%20last%20but%20not%20least%2C%20Bob.%22%7D" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">http://ncase.me/ballot/sandbox?m=%7B%22s%22%3A%22IRV%22%2C%22v%22%3A%5B%5B150%2C150%5D%5D%2C%22c%22%3A%5B%5B194%2C160%5D%2C%5B151%2C105%5D%2C%5B151%2C198%5D%2C%5B109%2C156%5D%2C%5B151%2C154%5D%5D%2C%22d%22%3A%22%5Btype%20a%20description%20for%20your%20model%20here.%20for%20example...%5D%5Cn%5CnLook%2C%20it's%20the%20whole%20shape%20gang!%20Steven%20Square%2C%20Tracy%20Triangle%2C%20Henry%20Hexagon%2C%20Percival%20Pentagon%2C%20and%20last%20but%20not%20least%2C%20Bob.%22%7D</a> (Just move orange around and see how silly the IRV results are!) EDIT3: have you considered a built-in url shortener? :P
Bevibel Harvey
2016-12-12 23:03:28 +0000 UTCThanks Tom! The models *only* deal with popular vote, not electoral vote. And Clinton did win the *popular* vote under our current FPTP system. (but lost the electoral vote) But uh yeah my Guesstimated Model still has Johnson as a Condorcet winner, which is not correct. GUESSTIMATES, OH WELL
Nicky Case
2016-12-12 19:55:14 +0000 UTCThanks Ben! You're right about the electoral college also being a big problem (and the U.K had a similar problem in their last election, see CGP's video: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I)" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r9rGX91rq5I)</a> I chose to focus entirely on the ballot because it'd be much, much easier to fix than the electoral college, but still have pretty huge effects: the biggest bang-for-buck. I wish I could've given more space to electoral college, proportional representation, gerrymandering, etc – but I was already pushing 4,000 words with that thing! Maybe for another time. P.S: Also, the electoral college *shouldn't* be a partisan issue, but given the, uh, events of the last month or so, I *really* can't talk about the electoral college right now without all its current baggage P.P.S: ack, you're right about the instant runoff glitch, it should be the *other* way around. thanks!
Nicky Case
2016-12-12 19:51:14 +0000 UTCAs they say a couple of times, the post is *not* about the 2016 US election—it’s intended to be worldwide.
Kat Suricata
2016-12-12 02:37:35 +0000 UTCI'm a bit confused by the glitch in instant runoff voting as you explained it. Here's a video: <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdXPb4L7PqU" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdXPb4L7PqU</a> It looked to me like the glitch was more that Triangle was winning at the start? I'm also a little frustrated at the complete skipping over of issues that I think are way more important regarding trust in US democracy, namely the idea that votes should count equally. People in "red states" and "blue states" know that their state is going to go one way and their vote is essentially meaningless, and that is (in my opinion) the #1 reason people don't vote, not because of the spoiler effect or any other "voting glitch" in the various systems you presented. The actual current US system is far less democratic than any of the systems on display here. Not that what you've done isn't a great tool for discussion of these systems, but you framed it in a damaging way by saying "This is about designing a democracy that people can trust... A full half of Americans did not vote," and then not once mentioning the state-winner-take-all issue.
Bevibel Harvey
2016-12-11 19:24:54 +0000 UTCRead/played it. Loved it. Awesome work Nicky, as usual. I feel like Trump should have won FPTP in the guesstimated 2016 model though :P
knowlsie
2016-12-11 17:55:10 +0000 UTC
