⸘Howdy‽

This is not a new idea.  It has much prior art.  Still, its mathematical properties are such that one should investigate it.  Before I continue, I stipulate that I have another idea, but this is important for expressing that idea, so list this 1stly:

1/r where r is rank.  Umm the votes.  Those for whom one supports receive positive rs; while those whom one rejects, receives negative votes.  It could work thus:

Alpha:
-1/6

Bravo:
+½

Charlie:
+1/1

Delta:
-⅓

Echo:
-1/7

Foxtrot:
-1/1

Golf:
+1/6

Hotel:
+⅓

India:
-1/9

Juliet:
-⅛

Kilo:
+1/7

Mike:
+1/1

November:
-¼

Oscar:
+¼

Papa:
-⅛

Quebec:

+⅛

Romeo:
+1/9

For making the mathematics easier, multiply the numbers by 2,520, which is the least common multiple of all natural numbers up to 9.  The voters need only give positive and negative ranks up to an absolute value of |9|:

-5 means -1/5 which is -504.  We can limit the range of ranks to single-digit numbers because the reason for an extended range is burying bad candidates like Hitler & Stalin, but we allow negative ratings, so this is unnecessary.

We allow equal rankings, but require consecutive rankings and starting these consecutive ratings at |1/1|.  This is a sanity-rule (ranking everyone either +9 (+1/9 (+280)) or -9 (-1/9 (-280)) would weaken one’s vote to the point that one might as well not have voted at all).

¡Peace!

--

“⸘Ŭalabio‽” <Walabio@MacOSX.Com>

Skype:
Walabio

An IntactWiki:
http://intactwiki.org

“You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts.”
——
Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan

Good Afternoon, alabio

You offer a way for the people vote for candidates who have already been
nominated for public office.  Have we not forgotten an important step?
Shouldn't we start by giving the people a way to select the best
candidates, in the first place

What could be more compelling evidence of the need to let the people
select the candidates for public office than the travesty playing out,
right now, in U. S. politics?

Can you suggest a practical way for a large electorate to sift among
themselves to find the best advocates of the public interest?

Fred Gohlke

Good Morning, Dermot

Thanks for your comment.  One of the many difficulties of sifting
through the electorate to find the best advocates of the public interest
is that many people lack the desire or ability to think carefully about
public problems.  Yet, to build a bottom-up political process we must
make it available to everyone.  Your idea ensures that those who
participate are people with a genuine interest in public affairs.

I'm not sure how a clustering algorithm would work; perhaps an exchange
of policy positions among interested parties.  In any case, the concept
will evolve, probably with changes, as thoughtful people help smooth out
the rough spots.  Like the autioneer says, "It doesn't matter where we
start.  It's where we end up that counts."

Any method we can devise that elevates our best people to public office
will benefit society.  It's a difficult task.  You've made a start.
Let's keep it rolling.

Fred Gohlke