This category is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums
This category is within the scope of WikiProject Systems, which collaborates on articles related to systems and systems science.SystemsWikipedia:WikiProject SystemsTemplate:WikiProject SystemsSystems
I was encouraged to see Category:Electoral systems by ballot type as a subcategory of Category:Electoral systems. When I'm discussing electoral systems with experts in the field, they tend to want to divide methods up between "cardinal" (assigning points to candidates; the more the better) and "ordinal" (i.e. ranking starting at "1" for the highest ranking, "2" for the second highest, etc). That applies to the ballot type, but it also applies to how the ballots get counted, and it's possible for a cardinal ballot to be used in methods that some experts call "ordinal". For some systems, (like STAR voting) the method has a distinctly cardinal ballot, but relies on ordinal voter preferences for the "runoff" round. Some systems (e.g. many methods that pass the Condorcet winner criterion) can take cardinal ballots and infer the voter preferences, normalizing the ballot to an ordinal ballot. So, my question: should there also be a new "Category:Electoral systems by counting method", sorting out the systems (such as "score voting" that simply add up scores on each ballot) from other systems (such as Copeland's method and "ranked pairs" that rely on knowing the pairwise preference of each voter). I'm not enough of an expert to know how the counting methods should be divided, but this seems worth thinking about, doesn't it? -- RobLa (talk) 08:34, 11 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
