Vote by values

The vote by values is a Voting system to elect a candidate or to retain an idea or a project. In jurys or competitions, the vote by values can also be used to obtain a classification. The vote by values belongs to the family of the balanced votes.

The principle consists in associating a value with each option of vote (i.e. with each candidate or idea subjected to the vote).

Contrary to the voting systems per classification (Method Condorcet, Méthode Bordered,…), the vote by values is explored little still today. But of the groups militate for its adoption with the reason that such a system would solve some paradoxes systems by classification.

Alternatives of the votes by values

Beach of values and semantic association

A voting system by values is defined initially by the scale of values proposed in the voters for each option of vote.

the scale can be simply expressed numerically on a beach of value going for example from -5 to +5 or from 0 to 100.
the scale can also be expressed symbolically or semantically. The scale is then brought back to a lower number of values, generally 3 or 5.
the scale generally used comprises simply two values (yes/not). One speaks then about vote by approval

Ways of calculating of the results

There exist two ways of calculating to determine the result of the election:

the method of the sum consists in adding the values allotted by the voters to each option. The option selected is that which obtained the most points. This method with the advantage of being very simple and does not require necessarily electronic means to lead to the result. It is however sensitive to the strategic votes and does not respect the criterion of the majority. This method can prove badly adapted within the framework of jurys and competitions.
One also proposed to evaluate a candidate by the median (and not the sum) of its evaluations. This is possible if the evaluations are qualitative without being numerical. Arises then a serious difficulty of decides between ex-aequos since if there are more candidates than of degrees of smoothness in the evaluations suggested then several candidates will have the same median evaluation. The method of the median evaluations is subjected to many paradoxes and it is easy to see that, if the voters evaluate sincerely, this method does not answer the criterion of the majority. Methods of resolution of the ex-aequos majority value were proposed by Michel Balinski and Rida Laraki. A first method makes it possible to select a winner, whereas a second makes it possible to obtain a classification of the whole of the options suggested with the vote.

Comparison with the binary voting systems

Compared to the binary voting systems (majority Uninominal system with a turn or with two turns), the advantage of this system is a taking into more faithful account of the opinion of the voter, who can in particular:

to express its disapproval as much as its approval,
to mark its support for several options (candidates or ideas), independently from/to each other.

Constraints of implementation

Without special precaution, the vote by values makes it possible to identify a signature of vote easily, exposing the voters to the electoral racket. For example, if one can give a note between 0 and 9 to 10 candidates, there is ten billion possible different bulletins (many values power many candidates, are 10¹⁰ here). However each polling station manages only a few hundreds of voters. It is thus possible with a Maffia to threaten a voter of reprisals if the bulletin {(A=2), (B=5), (C=0), (D=8), (E=1), (F=4), (G=9), (H=5), (I=7), (J=3)} is not found during the examination. The majority of the voters being able to be threatened in the same way, but with an imposed vote having a different signature, the Maffia can control the result of the election without pointing out itself authorities.

To avoid this pitfall, it is necessary to segment the bulletin of each voter in as many parts as there are candidates. It is then impossible to reconstitute the bulletin and to recognize the voter, while preserving 100% of the necessary information to the possible recounts. Concretely, two procedures are possible:

There exists bulletins as many as candidates (as in the French voting system binary), the voter folds up the bulletin in order to mask the value which it associated to the candidate, but lets appear the name of the candidate and must insert in the ballot box a bulletin for each continuing candidate.
the voter fills a single bulletin with all the listed candidates. The first stage of the examination consists to count and cut out the bulletins " in aveugle" in order to prevent any recognition of a voter at the time of the revelation of the values associated with the candidates.

See too

Bond external

Introduction to the vote by values of Michel Balinski and Rida Laraki
Présentation of the '' vote of value ''
has theory off measuring, electing and ranking (Mr. Balinski, R. Laraki)
American Site of promotion of the vote by values

Random links: