Multiple points per decision

Multiple points per decision based points allocation approach

Overview

Everyone is given the same number of points to allocate. The points allocation is a single fixed number. It is not based on any information about the voter, their voting power or any other part of the decision. Some example points allocations could be 10 points, 100 points or 500 points.

High accuracy & expressiveness (Score - 4)

A multiple points per decision approach would mean that each voter gets the same number of points to allocate in every decision. A large number of points could be effective at giving voters a highly expressive way to allocate their voting power across a wide range of proposals. The main problem with this approach is that the number of fillable positions can change in each decision. For decisions that have a large number of fillable positions the number of points that a voter receives to allocate might not be sufficient to enable voters to express their preferences.

Moderate voting complexity (Score - 3)

The voting process would be the same for every decision which helps to reduce the complexity for voters and make it easier to learn and use this approach repeatedly. The main complexity with this approach is the number of proposals submitted could change drastically between decisions. In these situations it might be more challenging to allocate the same number of points across a changing amount of proposals each time.

Moderate voting time required (Score - 3)

Voters would become familiar with the number of points to allocate, however for each decision they would need to compare the proposals to make a decision on how to allocate a single set of points between them. They would need to consider how many proposals they are going to approve and how they intend to split the points between the proposals they are going to approve.

Moderate game theory risks (Score - 3)

Bad actors could benefit from voting behaviour where voters dilute their voting power by allocating their points across more proposals than there are fillable positions. This behaviour can help to increase the intensity of the bad actors' voting power on influencing the decision outcome as they could benefit from using all of their full voting power on their own proposals.

Total score = 13 / 20