From this announcement, in my opinion.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/213731

I would like to use star.vote, if at all possible, but I understand it would be harder to control who is eligible to vote on an external site.

It’ll be interesting to see how the current plan works and what refinements are made.

If you like pictures, there is a visualization of the RCV/IRV flaws.

https://fosstodon.org/users/tcely/statuses/110291193062264304

RCV/IRV has been a scam for more than a century. Please look into how that was invented and how it actually performed. More than half the places that tried it actually removed it.

I don’t know why people keep being fooled by complexity, but they do.

Why are you trying to view everything and ban things you don’t like instead of viewing your subscriptions and only joining communities you do like?

CPG Grey has a lot of good videos, but ranked voting is not the way.

Arrow’s Impossibility Theorem makes this very clear.

https://star.vote/ is a good site to keep handy if you’re looking for a more expressive voting system.

By default, choosing approval voting is the simplest way with very good performance.

https://youtu.be/orybDrUj4vA

Why would my way of counting the approval ratio rather than approval-only be of any disadvantage?

That’s just how voting systems work. Even seemingly insignificant changes to the algorithm can have outsized impacts on how well it performs.

Plurality versus Approval is a specific example of this. Just changing “choose one” to “choose as many as you approve of” significantly impacts the amount of data that’s captured and often the outcome because of the effects on voters’ behaviors.

I liked the suggestion of more information. When we have it all figured out those details should be included as you suggested.

I like some of those suggestions. However, I don’t think down voting or abstaining should be supported. You either support an option by up voting or you take no action.

Approval voting systems have well studied behaviors and we should not deviate from that without a compelling reason.

Every approval / upvote is a distinct user endorsement for an option. The option with the most users endorsing it should be selected when that number exceeds 51% of the active users set we decide on.

Excess should be used for bounties to get features we want implemented added to Lemmy.

A high enough bounty and they can hire a part-time developer to work on our selected improvement.

I don’t want people who haven’t agreed to follow the same set of rules deciding what the rules are that I must follow.

It’s like how much of the world decided it didn’t enjoy colonial rule so much.

Open + Captcha