Voting
Voting refers to any system of making multiple choice collectively - it is typically used in elections to form a government which must make binding decisions that affect everyone, or elect a board (or sometimes even the management) of an enterprise.
In democratic elections the voting is closed and the vote counting is open.
Consumerium has the opposite system where voting is open though anonymized for consumer comfort and security and vote counting is closed and tunable which is possible because there is no requirement to reach a consensus like there is when electing elected representatives of the people in democratic elections.
Everybody will be able to see what everybody voted but not know which votes were cast by whom.
General
The voting pages are most obviously "noindex, nofollow" ( stops search engines from indexing ) and furthermore copyright of the wiki user i.e. not copylefted. If someone wants to publish vote sets in another namespace this surely will be allowed or even recommended. ( If NGOs want to publish vote sets it's sort of the revival of the indirect vote. ) See edits, votes and bets for the debate about how to decide the final Consumerium buying signal.
Some basic paradigms have been suggested to measure the support of campaigns:
- Direct Vote requires many votes and rewards heavy participation, and,
- Indirect Vote requires fewer votes and rewards faction organization
- and the oddly-named WikiVote which seems to overlap with both of them
This is one of many open questions that need to be resolved.
To vote or not to vote?
The Policy on Consumerium is that voting is discouraged for various reasons.
- ) By voting you open up yourself to severe consumption pattern profiling. Please consider not using real name if you intend to vote.
- ) We don't want any sorts of census effect à la facebook. So please, srsly, don't vote.
- ) Voting is unwiki
- ) ...
The trick is in the counting
So by closed and tuneable counting we mean that you can ( if you wish to ) have a personalized vote counting result because no consensus outcome is required.
The most simple way to achieve a vote counting result that is customized is to use automatic amplification, a one-check-box-solution, which is to say that the people who voted similar to you get more voting power ( say +30% ) ( amplification ) and those who voted conflicting with your votes get less ( dampening ) ( say -30% )
With the open voting, tuneable counting we are making sure that we have the highest resiliency to information warfare . Every time a skewing effort ( usually by paid trolls ) is detected proper counter measures ( parametrization of the vote counting ) can be formulated and distributed. The loss in this set-up is exposure to consumption pattern profiling for those who vote ( then again this happens in twitter and facebook too if you talk / like about your consumption habits ).
As in all highly-political wikis we expect a paid trolls vs. unpaid trolls situation. We are also optimist and hope that a healthy dynamic equilibrium(s) will form. :D :D
Planned vote structure
- User:Username/My representational vote (i.e. proxy or Indirect Vote, this is probably not used at all in the end)
- User:Username/Boycotts
- User:Username/Avoids
- User:Username/Supports
- User:Username/Recommends
- User:Username/Hedges
- User:Username/Hedges heavily
Use following syntax (vote only once on each "thing")
One can add any number of reasons by prefixing like this (you can intermix commas with "and"s so don't worry about that.
Company X for Reason 1, Reason 2 and Reason 3
in the above articles to cast your votes. Vote only once on one thing
What things can you vote on?
Everyone with over 50 edits may vote on any thing (it should be somehow related to production, trading or shoping), or but only the following will be tallied Companies, Brands, Products, Product groups, and Areas. If Votes overlap or conflict, the first or last vote encountered will be counted. This is yet to be decided.
What's this I keep hearing about a dual voting system?
Indirect Votes probably won't be implemented due to lack of interest
What one can vote?
Direct votes are:
| +2 | Recommends Company X | ||||
| +1 | Supports Company X | ||||
| +1 | Tries to support Company X | ||||
| 0 | is neutral about or | 00 (+1 and -1) | Levers [must find better word] or | 0000 (+2 and -2) | Levers heavily |
| -1 | Tries to avoid Company X | ||||
| -1 </td | Avoids Company X | ||||
| -2 | Boycotts Company X |
| All 0's move/lever the result towards | 50% positive. |
Voting result for Company X
Vote average on -2≤x≤2 scale normalized to 100%:
| Result Scale 1 |
| 0 ≤ x <40% positive on Company X (Red) | 40 ≤ x ≤ 60% (Yellow) | 60 < x ≤ 100% |
What's the ratio of 0's compared to all votes (percentage)
Other possible words to refer to this metric. These include:
- Levering towards 50% positive (bad. reference to leverage)
- Middlage/Middling (middlage is propably better, pronounced french way)
- Quasi-disputedness (maybe, maybe not)
- Neutralifying (maybe, maybe not)
- It's trollage again! All your 2 cows immediemente!
This metric is an Average (scale may have to be adjusted later when we can get info on what levels voting 0's settle into)
| 60 ≤ x ≤ 100% of votes are 0's | Notice the range here is 40% wide |
| 45 ≤ x < 60% of votes are 0's | |
| 30 ≤ x < 45% of votes are 0's | |
| 15 ≤ x < 30% of votes are 0's | |
| 0 ≤ x < 15% of votes are 0's |
Voting in the future
In the future you can use one line to vote on multiple entities on one line.
All votables that are before the keyword over gets voted up and every votable after that gets voted down.
etc.etc.