nardopolo.bsky.social
Entrepreneur, dreamer, clean transport/democracy advocate, gamer. Co-founder of GarageGames, founder of Arcimoto, Equal Vote Coalition, Bad Habit Software, instigator of Marble It Up!. Next projects… KAGR and UFTV :-).
76 posts
102 followers
88 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Where in the Met is Carmen Sandiego?
comment in response to
post
Checks out
comment in response to
post
When’s bsky getting the Spaces so I can hear your sweet nothings?
comment in response to
post
Sup dude
comment in response to
post
Ranked Robin is great. Right up there with STAR…
comment in response to
post
See STAR voting: www.equal.vote/strategic-star
comment in response to
post
Today I was gifted an antique sandalwood box with three moonstones inside… a sign of the times perhaps :-).
comment in response to
post
Relevant sections of the report are behind a paywall? Curious how the “painted bike lanes” are differentiated - ie old school narrow bike lanes versus eliminating street parking on one side and adding a healthy bike lane margin?
comment in response to
post
+1 for Bluesky :-)
comment in response to
post
Curious why you don’t allow comments on these videos?
comment in response to
post
Could be a bold step forward for Alaska…
comment in response to
post
Due in no small part to RCV’s breakage on Alaska’s first use, the suspicion of RCV in particular is quite high (bans in 11 states, a drubbing on the statewide measures, etc) Ranked Robin is arguably more intuitive for ranking - ie it’s like a round robin, and has the bonus of counting all the votes.
comment in response to
post
Any thoughts about working on an upgrade? RCV’s counting system breaks down when there are three or more competitive candidates in the race… seems like Alaska FWD could be a good champion for fixing it… See youtu.be/Y7xHB-av6Cc for an explainer of the problem and solutions.
comment in response to
post
Seems this thought exercise runs counter to the whole top 4 concept, no?
comment in response to
post
Laudable. Still thinking this whole concept ought be peer to peer in form…
comment in response to
post
Of course. The limit of a single choice in each election leads directly to the spoiler effect, which is a core problem.
comment in response to
post
The point of an equal vote is that multiple similar candidates should be able to compete on a level playing field and still have the outcome reflect the will of the voters overall. What you’re describing is what we have now with “choose only one” plurality voting and the spoiler effect.
comment in response to
post
Not sure how you get to that conclusion…
comment in response to
post
Huh?
comment in response to
post
Voting method reform can be accomplished at the local and state level (crucibles of democracy and all that). Getting rid of vote splitting in the choice process is key… if you haven’t, give unfuckthevote.com a gander… feedback welcome!
comment in response to
post
Our system’s limit of only two viable parties is an unfortunate byproduct of the use of voting methods that feature vote-splitting. The “right” faces the same factionalization problem as well. Really think it’d be a good time to move to a method that doesn’t cement spiraling polarization.
comment in response to
post
Eliminating vote-splitting doesn’t require PR, but it does require voting methods that provide an equal weight vote- STAR, Approval, Ranked Robin to name a few. (That’s not an argument against PR btw, but even single-winner representation can be made much more representative).
comment in response to
post
You might be mixing up an effect as a root cause. Many voters are turned off by both “sides” and both “sides” are driven by the same power dynamic: the aggregation of minority viewpoints to get to 50%+1. See unfuckthevote.com
comment in response to
post
“Curated” is a generous word in this use :-).
comment in response to
post
Let’s move past the duopoly and unfuckthevote.com
comment in response to
post
I’d argue a reasonable peace ambassador- he can offer factories that make cool shit and internet in the sky. Good openers.
comment in response to
post
Has the first buddy commented on the project? What’s the veto algorithm in the incoming admin?
comment in response to
post
Not at all… but gotta fix the root cause to get there… unfuckthevote.com
comment in response to
post
Yes please. Here’s one option… unfuckthevote.com
comment in response to
post
Getting involved in upgrades helps on this front (speaking personally, your mileage may vary). See unfuckthevote.com
comment in response to
post
Also, Musk is getting involved in conversations to try and de-escalate military tensions with Iran? How dare he! In these efforts wishing him success for all of us.
comment in response to
post
Still have yet to help build an RPG of legend… perhaps it’s time to dust off the unfinished high school project… #InSearchOfDawn
comment in response to
post
Also cool to learn that @johnromero.bsky.social worked on Space Rogue, another Origin masterpiece before its time. 2400 AD also popped up in there, which was better than its reception would suggest. Only error I noticed was that Origin made Autoduel, not Car Wars :-).
comment in response to
post
STAR Voting was invented to go further to deliver on the goals of the RCV movement while fixing serious issues with the 150 year old model.
STAR Voting is:
⭐ More user friendly
⭐ Easier to tally and audit
⭐ More accurate and representative
⭐ Safe to vote your conscience
⭐ Doesn't waste your vote
comment in response to
post
Your book gets here Friday, so give me a few days to see where you’re coming from and then let’s gooo! And have a happy holiday in the interim.
comment in response to
post
If your car explodes every few hundred times you drive it, that would be an outrageous level of failure. After just one fail in Alaska, partisans moved swiftly to avoid a repeat by deliberately narrowing the field, which sorta defeats the whole purpose. Australian parties behave similarly.
comment in response to
post
Finally, calling Alaska’s first use of RCV w/ top 4 an “anomaly” is a real stretch. RCV’s failure mode occurs with arguably unacceptable frequency whenever there are more than just two competitive candidates, a scenario that is much more likely in statewide open field elections…
comment in response to
post
I’ve got your book on order! Some thoughts… are you familiar w/ Quinn’s work on VSE (electionscience.github.io/vse-sim/) and Ogren’s further work (voting-in-the-abstract.medium.com/voter-satisf...)? Also, once I’ve had a chance to digest your writing, would love to do a podcast if you’re game :-).
comment in response to
post
This video - youtu.be/Y7xHB-av6Cc - walks through the math of the method and contrasts with the claims, using both a hypothetical example and Alaska’s first use as explainers. Particularly in combination with a Top-N primary, RCV is a poor choice for fair elections.
comment in response to
post
Ismar, appreciate the work you are doing on democracy reform, but encourage you to dig deeper on the math on RCV. You wrote, “… voters are not worried about wasting their votes [in RCV]…” - unfortunately RCV still has the “wasted” vote problem- voters who are not worried are simply misled…
comment in response to
post
With RCV the problem isn’t that some people don’t rank, it’s that RCV skips some voters’ ranks and counts the ranks of others. This leads to non-representative outcomes in meaningful contests. If you like rank order voting, Ranked Robin is a better approach- see www.equal.vote/ranked_robin
comment in response to
post
Would be great to see Alaska politicos push for upgrading the system to get rid of RCV’s spoiler effect— youtu.be/Y7xHB-av6Cc
comment in response to
post
You might want to dig in on the particulars- RCV is promoted on some great goals that it doesn’t actually live up to— see: youtu.be/Y7xHB-av6Cc