BOFFY Voting System Poll - READ BEFORE VOTING

[The Panda]

We had some discussion about voting systems, so I figured I'd make a poll.

 

I'll be straightforward with saying that I personally believe Preferential Voting Systems are the best system of voting.  I think it'll best represent an overall population in any setting, whether a Voting guild, or a forum.

 

My Reasoning for Preferential:

 

First there's two systems of preferential that we can do.  Both would require ranking all of the candidates you have seen.  You'd simply not rank the ones you haven't seen (while we'd encourage seeing all of the movies before voting, sometimes that's just not possible in time for the deadline.  Plus not seeing all of the movies would be an issue with any voting system).

 

The purpose of this is for a number of reasons

 

1.There are a number of categories where certain movies have multiple nominations.  While this should be a credit to the movie nominated, it creates vote splitting.  

 

For example in Best Original Song La La Land has three nominations and Moana and Sing Street have one.  Say there's a diverse opinion over what's the best song of the three options for La La Land, but everyone voting for a La La Land song would prefer a LLL song winning over Moana or Sing Street.  

 

Under straight voting you theoretically could get

22% You're Welcome

21% City of Stars

20% Another Day of Sun

19% Audition

18% Drive It Like You Stole It

 

Under straight voting, Moana wins that scenario with 22% of the vote even if (theoretically) 60% of the forum wanted a La La Land song to win over Moana. 

 

Under preferential voting, say all of Sing Street votes go to Moana and all other LLL votes go to City of Stars after each round.  Then City of Stars win with 60% support versus Moana's 40%.  

 

This solves the solution of vote-splitting happening from a movie getting multiple nominees in a cat. 

 

2.This allows people to vote for their actual preferred choice, and not just their preferred choice that they think has a possibility of winning.

 

Say for example your preference for Best Actress is Isabelle Huppert, but you don't think she'll get enough votes to be close to winning.

 

Under straight voting you might vote for somebody else (such as Amy Adams), taking away support from your actual preferred choice. 

 

Under a preferential system, you're free to put Huppert as your number 1 choice without worrying about hurting your number two choice's chances of winning against say your number 5 choice (say for example Emma Stone).

 

Preferential Voting should cause more people to vote for their honest favorite, and not just their favorite of the two frontrunners.

 

3.Theres also the option of a Run-Off Preferential System, where you rank all of the candidates.  Then there's a run off between the top two choices (however the run off is decided by the order everyone ranked their candidates).

 

In all practicality, it's a preferential system that cuts to the chase.

 

What To Do:

 

Please vote for your preferred voting system.  If you vote Preferential, please post whether you'd want a Typical Preferential System or a Run-Off Preferential System.

 

(In theory, a run off Preferential system would eliminate the possibility of anything but the top two choices from winning.  But in practicality I believe both would end up with the same results 95% of the time, so that's why I combined the two on the Poll options)

 

Deadline to vote in the poll is this Sunday at 11:59 PCT.

Edited January 28, 2017 by The Panda

[That One Girl]

Straight voting is better cause I'd be way too lazy to do preferential voting lol.

[WrathOfHan]

Preferential. I love rankings  

[Jason]

I generally prefer preferential voting with fully ranked ballots but for this I'd recommend a two-round runoff, where a run-off occurs only between the top two choices, using only second choice support from the remaining ballots (that had their first choice eliminated).

 

My reasoning is it's theoretically possible for a nominee with very weak first choice support to end up winning entirely on the strength of being widely viewed, with other nominees being eliminated not because they were placed at a lower rank, but because many ballots left them unranked. That's a distinction of little relevance in voting for political candidates, but potentially an important one here.

 

A two-round runoff would ensure that one of the candidates being hurt by a vote-split would have the opportunity to contend for the win, while also ensuring the winner is one that is a high-ranking choice (first or second) on a majority of ballots.

 

I actually agree with Panda that the chance of a nominee winning mainly on the strength of third choice, fourth choice support etc. is low (although I don't think we can estimate how low with any precision). But a two-round runoff would entirely eliminate the risk of that happening.