[FFmpeg-devel] [ANNOUNCE] upcoming vote: TC/CC elections

[Ronald S. Bultje]

Hi,

On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 7:01 PM Cosmin Stejerean via ffmpeg-devel <
ffmpeg-devel at ffmpeg.org> wrote:

> > On Nov 29, 2023, at 3:14 PM, Michael Niedermayer <michael at niedermayer.cc>
> wrote:
> >
> > If you give Jerry a weight of 10 and give Tom a weight of 9, that means
> > you prefer Jerry over Tom because 10 > 9
> > If you give Spike a weight of 20 that would mean you not only prefer
> Spike
> > over Tom OR Jerry but also over Tom AND Jerry. Because 20 > 10 + 9
> >
> > OTOH if you give Spike a weight of 18 that would mean you prefer Spike
> over
> > Tom OR Jerry but you prefer Tom AND Jerry over Spike.
> > Because: 9   < 10    < 18     < 9 + 10
> >         Tom < Jerry < Spike  < Tom and Jerry
>
> Is this last example the kind of preference that people are likely to want
> to express in practice? It seems much harder to reason about and much more
> likely to lead to mistakes.
>
> Given a list of say 7 candidates running for 5 positions that's 21
> possible combinations and in theory weights would have to be assigned such
> that the sum for each one of those 21 combinations is correctly ranked by
> order of preference.
>
> I think the simplicity of the simpler ranked choice voting might outweigh
> the benefit of expressing complex preferences with the sum of weights.
>

Does ranked voting allow expressing equal weight to multiple candidates?
For example, I prefer Jerry and Tom equally, but I prefer either one over
Spike.

Ronald