The Voting System That's Actually Too Good for Politicians to Allow on HackerTube: recommended by 7 Hacker News commenters across 7 separate months, 2015–2021.
explainer · evergreen
CGP Grey explains the Single Transferable Vote, a proportional ranked-ballot system, and why politicians have little incentive to adopt it. It is a short animated explainer of how multi-winner ranked voting works.
HN's default link for explaining STV in any thread on voting reform, ranked choice or gerrymandering.
“CGP Grey did a great video on STV”
18 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
Gerrymandering is a problem because we have a poor voting system. I'm not sure if a single transferrable vote (STV) is the best system, but it would significantly reduce the benefit of gerrymandering (and probably result in better candidates from both parties). CGP Grey did a great video on STV: ▶ this video
in “Gerrymandering with geographically compact districts” · View on HN
Ireland uses this appraoch. We call it STV. STV Explained -- ▶ this video It just a better democracy because it's more representative. It's solves the "wasted vote" problem people have with democracy and why many democracies result in a two party system. This way it ensures your vote is counted and multiple parties exist.
in “Ranked-choice voting is on the ballot in New York City” · View on HN
Now if only they would introduce something like Single Transferable Vote (entertaining CGPGrey video: ▶ this video ), or another more effective voting system. Probably won't happen though, as it would seriously shake up politics as we know it.
in “DARPA Is Building a $10M, Open-Source, Secure Voting System” · View on HN
erentz was probably referring to the single transferable vote system ( [link] ), which uses a ranked ballot in elections and results in relatively proportional representation. CGP grey explains it pretty well: ▶ this video
in “Commandeering Australian citizens to become spies” · View on HN
Elections are supposed to be bloodless revolutions. If you can't effect change through the electoral system, then the non violent solution is to revolutionize how we vote. Relevant videos (IMO) First Past The Post Voting - [link] Range Voting - [link] Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - [link] Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - [link] Bonus video This video will make you angry - [link]
in “The Second Half of Watergate Was Bigger, Worse, and Forgotten by the Public” · View on HN
Support anyone who wants to get rid of FPTP voting and introduce a more representative voting system (ranked choice, for example). Right now, people have to vote for the least of two shitty candidates. Instead, we could vote for the ones who represent us the most without worrying about who will actually win. This won't fix corporate corruption, which is the underlying cause of the attack on net neutrality, but it will certainly make representatives more beholden to their voters. ▶ this video
in ““Restoring Internet Freedom” Notice of Proposed Rulemaking [pdf]” · View on HN
Elections were (IMO) meant to be bloodless revolutions. its just the 1% has captured both primary political parties. Also, the flawed first past the post electoral system discourages competition (IMO to keep it cheaper for the 1% to own the whole process). I'll post some videos from people smarter then me: [link] [link] [link] ▶ this video [link] [link]
in “Robots Aren’t Killing the American Dream” · View on HN
> the EU is not democratic in the first place EU Election system is _literally_ one of the fairest systems in existence[0] ensuring that every party get some measure of proportional representation. Compared to English First Past the Post (minority rule, and 2 party systems) or Scotlands Single-transferrable vote (which is still winner take all); but D'Hondts method means that people can be safe in the knowledge they'll be represented and it's proportional to the input. It's not "perfect" but it's _literally_ the best humans have come up with. [0]: [link] [0.1]: [link] CGP Grey did some videos on these: FPTP (England): [link] STV (Scotland): ▶ this video D'Hondt-esque (EU): [link]
in “Indiscriminate messaging and chatcontrol: Last chance to protest” · View on HN
Reform the electoral system to achieve the representation we all deserve. The electoral system we use now: [link] Alternatives: [link] ▶ this video [link] [link] We can start introducing these to everyone at the state and local level to build momentum for electoral reform at the federal level. A good old fashioned general strike until we get what we need from our "representatives".
in “A tiny Swiss company thinks it can help stop climate change” · View on HN
How important is this privilege if I can maliciously control how you vote? Now imagine the good we can do with real electoral reform (Democrats idea of repealing citizens United is a meager start, but weak lip service to real reform) What we have now - First Past The Post Voting - [link] Range Voting - [link] Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - [link] Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - [link] Electoral reform is just step 1, something we can all come together for. Something no one could possibly be against. How about if I control who can be voted for? Of course it matters - [link] bonus video: This video will make you angry - [link]
in “U.S. Supreme Court Puts Limits on Police Power to Seize Private Property” · View on HN
The real problem is both main stream political parties don't represent around 45% of the country. First Past The Post Voting- [link] Range Voting- [link] Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video Alternative Vote - [link] Mixed-Member Proportional Representation - [link]
in “China May Have $5.8T in Hidden Debt with ‘Titanic’ Risks” · View on HN
Some tweaks I'd make: Corporate structure: [link] Electoral system: What we have now - [link] Range voting - [link] Alternative vote - [link] Single transferrable vote - ▶ this video Marx wrote about the theory of societal evolution; That there are certain phases civilization must pass through. The communism he wrote about would have to be very far down the road, 100+ years (IMO). This does not mean people sit back and do nothing, we still would have to work towards it. (Most) Capitalists profit from the status quo, and work to keep in place systems to maintain their spot in the hierarchy. Thus the antiquated electoral system in the USA, and the top heavy power/pay structures of business. TL;DR: give the average person more of a say/choice in the world they live in (politics/workplace), and they will find their way forward. (IMO)
in “Decline of Global Extreme Poverty Continues but Has Slowed” · View on HN
Yep, STV: Single Transferable Vote. ▶ this video Closer to home, it's also used by the Apache Software Foundation for the annual election of the Board of Directors. When the election is only for a single position, this is exactly equivalent to "instant runoff".
in “Politics is bad because we use an 18th century voting system” · View on HN
"bad electoral system." First Past The Post Voting - [link] Range Voting - [link] Single Transferable Vote - ▶ this video
in “Join the Battle for Net Neutrality” · View on HN
First Past the Post voting: [link] Range Voting: [link] Single Transferable vote: ▶ this video Do away with voting booths, attach voting to everyone's tax forms. Give everyone a $5 tax credit for voting. People who don't do taxes can go to a public library and just pull the voting portion off of the tax forms there and mail it in. Break up corporations in every sector of the economy and either resell the chunks back to the market or turn them all into 100% worker owned and operated co-ops.
in “More Than a Million Pro-Repeal Net Neutrality Comments Were Likely Faked” · View on HN
Perhaps because powerful people don't want to find a solution; The powerful is exactly who is represented in our flawed electoral system: http//i.imgur.com/Uc6kX8G.jpg [link] [link] ▶ this video
in “The nearly 5M US Census Blocks with zero population (2014)” · View on HN
I wish they also enacted multi-winner ranked choice voting (also called Single Transferable Vote) for legislature. Fair representation beats winner-takes-all systems every time, because it guarantees more than just two parties get to be in charge, much like in parliamentary systems (which also use some kind of fair/proportional representation voting system). But it's still a good start, and maybe other states will take a look at both, and choose a better system next time. By the way, this is exactly the sort of thing Sam Altman should be fighting for, along with joining Wolf-Pac, Represent.Us, and others to get money out of politics. Not try to use GOTV tactics to get people to vote for his preferred candidate. That is, if Altman still cares about this, and the "improve democracy thing" he pushed for earlier wasn't just a one time ruse to get people to vote for Clinton. If Altman is serious about improving democracy, these right here are by far the best ways to do it - way better than just trying to "increase turnout" in an election. Because for one, fair representation voting systems increase turnouts by default, because people feel better represented and have more reasons to go out and vote, and second, STV also eliminates gerrymandering, which would also greatly improve democracy by making seats less safe. [link] [link] STV by CGP Grey: ▶ this video Droop method for STV is probably preferable: [link] Also preferred by FairVote: [link]
in “Maine Ranked Choice Voting Initiative Approved” · View on HN
Multi-winner ranked choice voting would do much more good to the democracy of US than ensuring the Democrat and Republican seats are "fair", and it would also solve the gerrymandering problem as a consequence: [link] ▶ this video
in “Let Math Save Our Democracy” · View on HN