If I got this right, the 'proper way'* to vote seems to be to be
1) If you vote early, just vote in a first preference, according to what you like best. Second prefence is something you add later to do strategic thing depending on how voting trends emerged.
2) if you vote later, vote in a first preference, according to what you like best, with no attention given to voting trends. For second preference, vote in strategically.
Like that?
*(not 'proper way' in the sense I think people who vote not in this way is wrong, but there implied such 'proper way' to exist, and I'm figuring what that is, or to be more precise I'm trying to figure out 'a proper way' that works)
analysis:
#1, well, that doesn't seem that much different from normal strategic voting? The difference is that with normal voting sceme, your strategic vote is added to your, err, by-the-heart vote, instead of supplanting it.
#2, is not that different with normal voting scheme either, since what matters in the end is more likely to be your strategic vote than your heart vote. The difference is you got to insert both vote instead of just one.
The difference seems to come down to psychological. "I'll vote according to some compromise strategy, but at least I got to pronounce my heart out on which choice I would ideally prefer'. Admitedly, 'pronounce your heart out' is not unimportant benefit. We all have seen (and be) that kind of voter who vote for the appealing but hopeless vote, just because.
But that's make things confusing on what's the point of this voting sceme then, in practical terms, especially when compared with CCP grey video used to explain alternative vote. I'm writing this wordvomit in attempt to figure it out myself.
I think part of it maybe related to using CCP grey video to talk explain alternative voting system. Thing is, quest voting is different situation than democratic election. Quest voting is open and revisable until the time its called of. Meanwhile the democratic ballot is blind, and each voter have only one chance to insert their vote. So the dynamic is a bit different.
For instance, 'Instant Runoff Voting' is not really exist as advantages. Since every voters can see the emerging trend as the votes coming in, and they can can react to it immediately without waiting. Quest voting is essentially already running on 'instant runoff voting' as basic feature. Well, that's assuming each voter have time/willingness to check back periodically and react though.
Thus the advantage of alternative voting in Quest voting isn't facilitating 'instant runoff', it is to to allow players to participate in the 'runoff voting' (or strategic voting we questers commonly call it) while being absent. For players don't have a problem in being present for strategic voting stage, this advantage is immaterial.
But the more important advantage said in CCP grey video of alternative voting system is the spoiler effect ... I'm don't have any sure conclusion about this yet. I'm still trying to contemplate spoiler effect in the context of quest voting dynamics.
Hmm, tentatively it seems that spoiler effect is less of a worry in a quest voting context, because again, the constant voters reaction and vote change according to trend. Though again here, this advantages only matters to questers who cannot participate constantly during voting period. I may be mistaken something here or there's more to it, but that's what I got.
Thus, alternative voting advantages in the context quest seems boiled to two matters:
-the ability to declare what your ideal preference is
-the ability to contribute to strategic voting stage during the later part of voting session time, without having to be present in-thread at that time to present a new vote
1) If you vote early, just vote in a first preference, according to what you like best. Second prefence is something you add later to do strategic thing depending on how voting trends emerged.
2) if you vote later, vote in a first preference, according to what you like best, with no attention given to voting trends. For second preference, vote in strategically.
Like that?
*(not 'proper way' in the sense I think people who vote not in this way is wrong, but there implied such 'proper way' to exist, and I'm figuring what that is, or to be more precise I'm trying to figure out 'a proper way' that works)
analysis:
#1, well, that doesn't seem that much different from normal strategic voting? The difference is that with normal voting sceme, your strategic vote is added to your, err, by-the-heart vote, instead of supplanting it.
#2, is not that different with normal voting scheme either, since what matters in the end is more likely to be your strategic vote than your heart vote. The difference is you got to insert both vote instead of just one.
The difference seems to come down to psychological. "I'll vote according to some compromise strategy, but at least I got to pronounce my heart out on which choice I would ideally prefer'. Admitedly, 'pronounce your heart out' is not unimportant benefit. We all have seen (and be) that kind of voter who vote for the appealing but hopeless vote, just because.
But that's make things confusing on what's the point of this voting sceme then, in practical terms, especially when compared with CCP grey video used to explain alternative vote. I'm writing this wordvomit in attempt to figure it out myself.
I think part of it maybe related to using CCP grey video to talk explain alternative voting system. Thing is, quest voting is different situation than democratic election. Quest voting is open and revisable until the time its called of. Meanwhile the democratic ballot is blind, and each voter have only one chance to insert their vote. So the dynamic is a bit different.
For instance, 'Instant Runoff Voting' is not really exist as advantages. Since every voters can see the emerging trend as the votes coming in, and they can can react to it immediately without waiting. Quest voting is essentially already running on 'instant runoff voting' as basic feature. Well, that's assuming each voter have time/willingness to check back periodically and react though.
Thus the advantage of alternative voting in Quest voting isn't facilitating 'instant runoff', it is to to allow players to participate in the 'runoff voting' (or strategic voting we questers commonly call it) while being absent. For players don't have a problem in being present for strategic voting stage, this advantage is immaterial.
But the more important advantage said in CCP grey video of alternative voting system is the spoiler effect ... I'm don't have any sure conclusion about this yet. I'm still trying to contemplate spoiler effect in the context of quest voting dynamics.
Hmm, tentatively it seems that spoiler effect is less of a worry in a quest voting context, because again, the constant voters reaction and vote change according to trend. Though again here, this advantages only matters to questers who cannot participate constantly during voting period. I may be mistaken something here or there's more to it, but that's what I got.
Thus, alternative voting advantages in the context quest seems boiled to two matters:
-the ability to declare what your ideal preference is
-the ability to contribute to strategic voting stage during the later part of voting session time, without having to be present in-thread at that time to present a new vote
Last edited:
