this post was submitted on 20 May 2025

940 points (98.2% liked)

You Should Know

38211 readers

1934 users here now

YSK - for all the things that can make your life easier!

The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:

Rules (interactive)

Rule 1- All posts must begin with YSK.

All posts must begin with YSK. If you're a Mastodon user, then include YSK after @youshouldknow. This is a community to share tips and tricks that will help you improve your life.

Rule 2- Your post body text must include the reason "Why" YSK:

**In your post's text body, you must include the reason "Why" YSK: It’s helpful for readability, and informs readers about the importance of the content. **

Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.

Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.

Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.

That's it.

Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.

Posts and comments which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.

Rule 6- Regarding non-YSK posts.

Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-YSK posts using the [META] tag on your post title.

Rule 7- You can't harass or disturb other members.

If you harass or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.

If you are a member, sympathizer or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.

For further explanation, clarification and feedback about this rule, you may follow this link.

Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.

Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.

Let everyone have their own content.

Rule 10- The majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.

Unless included in our Whitelist for Bots, your bot will not be allowed to participate in this community. To have your bot whitelisted, please contact the moderators for a short review.

Rule 11- Posts must actually be true: Disiniformation, trolling, and being misleading will not be tolerated. Repeated or egregious attempts will earn you a ban. This also applies to filing reports: If you continually file false reports YOU WILL BE BANNED! We can see who reports what, and shenanigans will not be tolerated.

Partnered Communities:

You can view our partnered communities list by following this link. To partner with our community and be included, you are free to message the moderators or comment on a pinned post.

Community Moderation

For inquiry on becoming a moderator of this community, you may comment on the pinned post of the time, or simply shoot a message to the current moderators.

Credits

Our icon(masterpiece) was made by @clen15!

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

940

YSK that in 16 States in the USA has banned Ranked-Choice voting, including 5 that has just banned it in 2025, and 6 of those bans happened in 2024. (ballotpedia.org)

submitted 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) by throwawayacc0430 to c/[email protected]

193 comments fedilink hide all child comments

RCV trends: Four states ban RCV in 2025, bringing the number of states with bans to 15.

(Okay idk why it says 15 up here then later says 16, somebody on that site probably didn't update the title text)

As of April 30, five states had banned RCV in 2025, which brought the total number of states that prohibit RCV to 16.

Gov. Mark Gordon (Republican) signed HB 165 on March 18.

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey (Republican) signed SB 490 the March 19.

Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly (Democrat) signed SB 6 into law on April 1.

North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong (Republican) signed HB 1297 on April 15.

Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders (Republican) signed HB 1706 which became law on April 17.

Six states banned RCV in 2024.

Why YSK: If you're a US-American, its time to pay attention to State and Local politics instead of solely on the Federal. There is a trend in conservative jurisdictions to stop progress in making elecoral systems more fair. Use this opportunity as a rallying-cry to pass Ranked-Choice Voting in progressive jurisdictions, and hopefully everyone else takes notes. Sometimes, all you need is a few states adopting a law to become the catalyst for it to become the model for the entire country, for better or for worse. Don't allow anti-RCV legislations to dominate, counter the propaganda with pro-RCV arguments. Time to turn the tide.

Edit: fixed formatting

Edit 2: Added in the map so you don't have to click the link:

See the pattern? 🤔

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (3 children)

The ballot is the same for all ranked voting methods. The method of determining winner from those ballots varies, and some are clearly worse.

For instance, if a candidate would beat all others 1-on-1 (Condorcet winner), then should a decent method always select that candidate as winner? RCV doesn't do that.

Example

A > B > C: 2

C > B > A: 2

B > C > A: 1

Who wins according to instant run-off? C. Who wins against every opponent 1-on-1? B.

Other methods also fail.

This nice table compares voting methods by a wide range of properties. I don't think it hurts to make a more informed decision before backing a method that will be difficult to change. The US got stuck with FPTP through inadequate research, and it'd be great not to repeat that mistake.

While rated voting methods fail the Condorcet winner criterion, by rating instead of ranking candidates they satisfy another set of criteria also worth considering.

Among ranked voting methods, ranked pairs seems most compelling to me. Among rated voting methods, approval seems pretty good (and extremely simple).

[–] throwawayacc0430 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

I retract this portion of the comment and put in this spoiler

Among ranked voting methods, ranked pairs seems most compelling to me.

I think that'd fail miserably in the real world.

Think about the average voter. They see this ballot:

A vs B?

A vs C?

A vs D?

B vs C?

B vs D?

C vs D?

Yea I think they're gonna freak out upon seeing this ballot. Right now, the most important goal should be to get rid of the spoiler effect and FPTP, rather than finding the best system.

approval seems pretty good (and extremely simple).

I can see a bit of strategic voting happening.

Let me demonstrate:

For the sake of simplicity, let's say we have 3 candidates, and no term limits:

Trump, Biden, Sanders

Biden and Sander voters dispise trump, their preference in RCV is (example):

Biden>Sanders>Trump: 30%
Sander>Biden>Trump: 25%
Trump>Sanders>Biden: 23%
Trump>Biden>Sanders: 22%

Okay, so lets say they all approve their top 2:

Biden: 77%
Sanders: 78%
Trump: 45%

Okay we have president Sanders! Congrats, right?

Well, now the trumpers who approved sanders are like: "Hey wait a minute, we made our daddy lose because we approved Sanders"

All the trumpers now have a meeting and decided that next election, they don't approve Sanders or Biden as a strategic vote.

So now, Election 2 Results:

Biden: 55%
Sanders: 55%
Trump: 45%

Oh great, it's a tie. The law says that the election have to be re-done to solve the tie:

Now this next election, all people who preferred Sanders first go to a Sanders supporter meeting and started saying: "Lets disapprove Biden so Bernie can win!"

Simultaneously, Biden voters will be like: "Lets disapprove Sanders so Biden can win!"

Next election results:

Trump: 45%
Biden: 30%
Sanders 25%

Congrats, we have a glorified FPTP and spoiler effect yet again!

Now, other election systems could also have strategic voting, but its less likely with, for example, RCV, since you can rank candidates.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (1 children)

Yea I think they’re gonna freak out upon seeing this ballot.

I think you missed the first sentence I wrote:

The ballot is the same for all ranked voting methods.

Maybe explaining what you think that means would clear up confusion?

I can see a bit of strategic voting happening.

Yes, approval voting is indeed susceptible to strategies including burial, which leads to a "chicken dilemma".

[–] throwawayacc0430 2 points 1 day ago

Ah nvm, I thought the ballot was gonna lok like this: