Maximum proposal allocation factors for consideration
Listing the different factors that will be considered for each maximum proposal allocation approach
The methodology used for this approach comparison is documented separately.
Accuracy & expressiveness
Description - Encouraging or limiting how voters can allocate their points can influence the accuracy and expressiveness of the voting system.
Importance score - 5, Very important. A loss in expressiveness and accuracy can lead to decision outcomes that do not fairly represent the preferences and opinions of the voters. Adding a points allocation cap to each proposal could prevent important information from being shared due to how voters are able to allocate their points.
Scoring questions - How does the maximum proposal allocation approach influence how voters can allocate their points? Does it encourage or prevent voters from voting in certain ways that might be a normal or desired behaviour? Can voters express their exact preferences and opinions? What accuracy in outcome could this lead to?
Scoring - High accuracy & expressiveness is good (Score - 5). Low accuracy and expressiveness is bad (Score - 1).
Voting complexity
Description - The number of points a voter can allocate to each proposal and how those allocated points can impact someone's voting power can influence the complexity of the voting process.
Importance score - 5, Very important. Increases in voting complexity could lead to a reduction in participation due to voters not having enough capacity or interest to vote on many proposals across many decisions.
Scoring questions - How complex is it for a voter to allocate their points across proposals in each decision? Does the maximum proposal allocation approach negatively influence or limit how voters can participate?
Scoring - Low complexity is good (Score - 5). High complexity is bad (Score - 1).
Time required to participate
Description - The number of points a voter can allocate to each proposal can influence how long it takes to participate in the voting process.
Importance score - 5, Very important. Reducing the time required to participate in voting will be very important for maximising the amount of people that can feasibly participate due to their own capacity and time constraints. The larger the number of voters the more important this factor becomes.
Scoring questions - How long would it take for someone to participate and allocate their points in a decision? What happens if there are many decisions that use this approach?
Scoring - Low time required is good (Score - 5). High time required is bad (Score - 1).
Game theory risks
Description - How voters are able to allocate their points could give bad actors an edge in the voting process and increase their chances of influencing a decision.
Importance score - 5, Very important. Making a robust voting process at scale will need to think about how it can prevent bad actors from abusing the voting process due to how they could allocate their points whilst voting in an attempt to get an edge over normal voting behaviours.
Scoring questions - How could bad actors take advantage of the voting process based on how the average voter participates? Could bad actors be given an advantage if people vote in a certain way?
Scoring - Low risk is good (Score - 5). High risk is bad (Score - 1).
Last updated