Fixed maximum allocation

Fixed maximum allocation approach for per decision points allocation approaches

Overview

Voters can only allocate a fixed number of points per proposal. Each proposal would have a limited number of points that can be allocated to it. This forces voters to either spread their votes across multiple proposals or not utilise all their points.

Moderate accuracy & expressiveness (Score - 3)

A limited allocation on each proposal means voters can only somewhat express their full intensity of preferences towards each proposal. If a multiple points option is used then the intensity of preference can be indicated by reducing the points allocated to a proposal below the limit. Voters are still able to spread their points across as many proposals as they wish and can consolidate them up until the limit across the proposals they prefer. Using the number of available positions to be filled could be a suitable approach as a limit per proposal to encourage voters to spread their votes across a large enough number of proposals that could fill the positions.

Low voter complexity (Score - 4)

This approach is simple for voters to understand as they are given a number of points and they simply allocate them to any proposals they prefer up until the limit on each proposal. This approach would encourage voters to spread their points across more proposals which does add some extra complexity for the voters to handle if they do want to allocate all of their points. Regardless of how someone votes their full voting power would be utilised which keeps the voting process simple for the voter as they don’t need to think about how their voting behaviour impacts their usage of voting power.

Low time required (Score - 4)

Voters could allocate their points mostly how they want to up until they hit the limits on each proposal. Voters who were going to consolidate their votes might need to spend some more time than they were intending to so they can identify other proposals that they might want to vote for.

Moderate game theory risks (Score - 3)

Bad actors could create multiple proposals to better utilise their own points by allocating them across these submitted proposals. Voters that consolidate their points on proposals will utilise their entire voting power and not give bad actors any increased amount of influence over the decision outcome. If voters distribute their points more broadly across many proposals and don’t allocate points up to the maximum threshold there is a risk this behaviour could reduce the voters influence over the decision outcome. Points that are spread too thin across multiple proposals could give bad actors an increased influence on decisions as they can always consolidate their points on their proposals up to the maximum cap to generate the most impact. If voters do generally allocate points up to the limit on most proposals the bad actors would not get any added influence over the decision outcome. Consolidation of points is not a concerning voting behaviour with this approach, spreading points too thinly is the main concern as bad actors could look to consolidate their points as much as possible.

Total score = 14/20