Hi all, proxy voting for a person i in a specific election could maybe be formalized as follows:
V:=(v1,...vi,..., vN), where vi is the vote of voter i, 1<=i<=N, N is the number of voters. V is the actual or publically announced votes of the voters, where 1 means yes, and 0 means no. sum(V) counts the number of yes votes in V. sum(-V):=sum(-1*V+1) counts the number of no votes in V. Let Wi:=fi(V). Wi is the vector of weights that voter i attaches to the votes in V, Wi=(Wi1,...Wii,...,WiN), 1<=i<=N., where the sum of all weights in Wi, sum(Wi) must be <=1 fi(V) is a function which is specific for voter i and allocates the vote of person i according to the votes in V. Example, voter i gives the vote to voter j (i.e. j is the proxy of i). We get Wi=fi(V)=(0,...,1,...,0), where the 1 occurs on place j in the vector, The vote tally is conducted as follows: The yes vote of voter i is then calculated as the sum of weights for the yes votes: sum(Wi*V):=Wi1*V1+Wi2*V2+...+WiN*VN The no vote of voter is is calculated as the sum of weights for the no votes: sum(Wi*-V). Example: Say we have three voters a, b, c. The vote is on bill B. V=(1, 0, 1), i.e. a and c votes yes. b votes no. Wa=(1,0,0), a votes for him/herself not delegating to any proxy Wb=(1,0,0) if sum(V)>=2, Wb=(0,1,0) otherwise (i.e. the weight vectors with weight 1 for the first yes vote and the first no vote in V respectively), i.e. b votes according to the majority of the voters (like in a party fraction in parliament) Wc=(1/3,2/3,0), i.e. c gives 1/3 of the vote to a and 2/3 of the vote to b. Tally: a: yes: 1, no: 0 b: yes: 1, no: 0 c: yes: 1/3, no: 2/3 Total: yes:2 1/3, no: 2/3 B gets a majority of yes votes and bill B is approved. I think the generic framework above could be helpful when discussing the possibilities of proxy voting. Best regards Peter Zbornik On Sun, Oct 30, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Michael Allan <m...@zelea.com> wrote: > > Dear Mike (and Kathy), > > Mike wrote: > > And a proxy needn't be a political figure, party leader, candidate, > > or anyone special. One's proxy could be _anyone_ whom one wants to > > vote for hir. (As designated for a particular issue-category, or a > > particular vote, or as pre-chosen default proxy). It could be a > > friend, family member, or any kind of public figure or advocate, > > etc. > > I see such flexibility as a step toward the more general facility of > giving the elector hir own ballot to do with as s/he pleases. In that > sense, proxy voting is a partial solution to the problems described > here in my thesis, which I trace precisely to the lack of such a > facility: http://zelea.com/project/autonomy/a/fau/fau.xht > > I do technical work with proxy voting myself for project Votorola. > See the figure caption at bottom for links to the voting theory: > http://zelea.com/project/votorola/home.xht > > > As You [Kathy] suggested, you could designate a different proxy for > > various kinds of issues. But there could be different opinions on > > which issues are in which categories, unless vote issues are > > specifically designated by categories. For that reason, it might be > > necessary to designate such special proxies at the time of > > voting. But maybe not: Maybe, if vote issues are > > officially-designated by category, you could have pre-chosen proxies > > for different categories of votes. > > > > Of course, in addition, you could designate a special proxy (or a > > special ranking of proxies) for any particular vote too. > > We found it simpler to begin there, with the assumption that the voter > would cast a separate vote on every issue. This is the general case > for us. Category voting then becomes the special case; or actually > cases, because we allow any number of category schemes to be layered > atop the simple general system. > > -- > Michael Allan > > Toronto, +1 416-699-9528 > http://zelea.com/ > > > Mike Ossipoff wrote: > > Kathy-- > > > > You wrote: > > > > > > Why not make the idea better yet? Allow all voters to select a > > different representative for each issue of interest to the voter, so > > that one rep might be tasked to vote on environmental issues, another > > on education issues, and perhaps another on foreign trade treaty > > issues or on judicial appointments.... A voter could simply select a > > person to vote on all issues, or select separate persons for different > > issues. > > > > [endquote] > > > > Absolutely. I don't remember if that was in my earlier proposal, but of course > > it should be. > > > > One would have a pre-chosen default proxy designation, as I described, but one would also be > > able to designate a proxy on any particular vote. > > > > And a proxy needn't be a political figure, party leader, candidate, or anyone special. > > One's proxy could be _anyone_ whom one wants to vote for hir. (As designated for a particular > > issue-category, or a particular vote, or as pre-chosen default proxy). > > It could be a friend, family member, or any kind of public figure or > > advocate, etc. > > > > The Proxy Direct Democracy that I proposed could be voted by telephone or Internet. > > > > As I mentioned, the voter would have an anonymous voter ID number. > > > > That would make voting by telephone or website feasible. > > > > Here's one way that the voter could get that ID number: > > > > The person intending to register to vote writes a random 20 digit number on a piece > > of paper, and folds the paper. In the registration office, s/he drops it into a drum > > of other people's similarly-folded, identical-looking, voter ID number slips, and turns the drum, to obscure which paper > > s/he dropped in. > > > > That number now is an anonymous voter ID number. A voter can use it to vote by phone, or at > > a website. And, additionally, of course, the voter can designate a default proxy, for any vote in > > which that voter doesn't take part. > > > > > > As You suggested, you could designate a different proxy for various kinds of issues. But > > there could be different opinions on which issues are in which categories, unless vote issues are > > specifically designated by categories. For that reason, it might be necessary to designate such > > special proxies at the time of voting. But maybe not: Maybe, if vote issues are officially-designated by > > category, you could have pre-chosen proxies for different categories of votes. > > > > Of course, in addition, you could designate a special proxy (or a special ranking of proxies) for > > any particular vote too. > > > > So you can vote only on issues that interest you and that you're informed on, confident that > > you've designated someone else to vote on the others for you. > > > > Mike Ossipoff > > > > > > guess a potential problem with this is that some issues > > overlap and Congress would have to stop the horsetrading process of > > throwing dozens of unrelated things into the same bill. > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info