Cumulative Voting Question

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I think my brain is just getting frazzled after discussing this so much with someone, but in voting for a multi-winner using cumulative voting:

In the example of:

• 10 positions
• 1,050 delegates
• 10,500 possible votes
• 1,030 delegates casting a ballot
• 10,300 votes cast

 

What number of votes would define majority in this scenario, 516 (majority of delegates casting a ballot) or 5,151 (majority of votes cast)?

[puzzling]

On 12/21/2022 at 12:10 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

I think my brain is just getting frazzled after discussing this so much with someone, but in voting for a multi-winner using cumulative voting:

In the example of:

• 10 positions
• 1,050 delegates
• 10,500 possible votes
• 1,030 delegates casting a ballot
• 10,300 votes cast

 

What number of votes would define majority in this scenario, 516 (majority of delegates casting a ballot) or 5,151 (majority of votes cast)?

it depends do you mean cumulative voting in the sense A- that a member can vote more than once for the same candidate. ( so up to 10 times for the same candidate)

B- that a member can vote for A maximum of 10 different candidates?

if A- members can vote more than once for the same candidate in principle 5.151 votes (guess no candidate will reach that level)  

if B- 516 ballots (majority of ballots)

in either case I fear you will have lots of revotes  because not enough candidates will get a majority.

Better use the procedure of RONR , delegates may vote for as many different candidates as they please, but only candidates on a majority of ballots (516 in this case) are elected (and only the ones with the highest number of votes if there are more candidates than positions)

but probably your bylaws will give other ways to decide who is elected.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

This is a theoretical question - just would like an answer not advice on whether it is a good idea or not (this is someone else's idea and I am just trying to get an answer for them).

 

It is cumulative voting in the sense stated by RONR.  A person can cast all 10 of their votes for one candidate, two candidates, or any combination.

[Josh Martin]

On 12/20/2022 at 6:10 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

I think my brain is just getting frazzled after discussing this so much with someone, but in voting for a multi-winner using cumulative voting:

In the example of:

• 10 positions
• 1,050 delegates
• 10,500 possible votes
• 1,030 delegates casting a ballot
• 10,300 votes cast

What number of votes would define majority in this scenario, 516 (majority of delegates casting a ballot) or 5,151 (majority of votes cast)?

It would be the majority of ballots cast (516), unless the organization's rules provide otherwise.

"In an election of members of a board or committee in which votes are cast in one section of the ballot for multiple positions on the board or committee, every ballot with a vote in that section for one or more candidates is counted as one vote cast, and a candidate must receive a majority of the total of such votes to be elected." RONR (12th ed.) 46:33

Nothing in RONR suggests that the use of cumulative voting changes the threshold required for election.

"For ballot or roll-call elections of boards, committees, delegates, or other positions held by more than one individual, the bylaws may provide for cumulative voting. In this form of voting, each member is entitled to cast one vote for each position, so that if, for example, three directors are to be elected, each member may cast three votes. These votes may all be cast for one, two, or three candidates, as the voter chooses. A minority group, by coordinating its effort in voting for only one candidate who is a member of the group, may be able to secure the election of that candidate as a minority member of the board. However, this method of voting, which permits a member to cast multiple votes for a single candidate, must be viewed with reservation since it violates the fundamental principle of parliamentary law that each member is entitled to one and only one vote on a question." RONR (12th ed.) 46:43

On 12/20/2022 at 6:40 PM, puzzling said:

it depends do you mean cumulative voting in the sense A- that a member can vote more than once for the same candidate. ( so up to 10 times for the same candidate)

B- that a member can vote for A maximum of 10 different candidates?

Cumulative voting is defined in RONR (12th ed.) 46:43, and it does indeed mean "that a member can vote more than once for the same candidate."

On 12/20/2022 at 6:40 PM, puzzling said:

if A- members can vote more than once for the same candidate in principle 5.151 votes (guess no candidate will reach that level)  

I see nothing in RONR which suggests that adopting the use of cumulative voting changes the threshold for election.

Edited December 21, 2022 at 02:48 AM by Josh Martin

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Thank you that is what I thought, but my brain has been mush this week.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 12/20/2022 at 7:10 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

I think my brain is just getting frazzled after discussing this so much with someone, but in voting for a multi-winner using cumulative voting:

In the example of:

• 10 positions
• 1,050 delegates
• 10,500 possible votes
• 1,030 delegates casting a ballot
• 10,300 votes cast

 

What number of votes would define majority in this scenario, 516 (majority of delegates casting a ballot) or 5,151 (majority of votes cast)?

There are 1050 delegates and therefore a maximum of 1050 ballots, and a majority of those ballots actually cast is required to elect.  A ballot that votes for no candidates for that office is an abstention, not a ballot cast.   A ballot that has a single vote and another with all ten votes marked, both count as one ballot cast.

[Shmuel Gerber]

On 12/20/2022 at 9:47 PM, Josh Martin said:

Nothing in RONR suggests that the use of cumulative voting changes the threshold required for election.

But the whole point of it is that "A minority group, by coordinating its effort in voting for only one candidate who is a member of the group, may be able to secure the election of that candidate as a minority member of the board."

So I don't think a majority vote carries much significance in this context. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I don't know for certain, but I thought that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality. 

[puzzling]

An more  and better explanation maybe:

(be aware this may frazzle your mind)

All voting systems are riddled with paradoxes , unwarranted outcomes and the like. (frazzle one)

Culumative voting is one of the many voting systems 

 

The RONR standard way is another (i think voting experts would call the RONR way something like a majority approval voting system)

The voting method described in RONR (mail voting, a form of a majority transferable vote system) is a third.

Culumative voting has its own pro/ cons (a pro if you like it , a con if you don't)

the pro is that it can lead to a broad representation (a relativly small group of voters can get their candidate on the board by using all their votes on that one candidate, this is called bullet voting.

Therefore culumative voting can (and will) lead to a broad and divided board

 

the RONR way leads to a board were every member has a majority behind them , so candidates only supported (or better technically approved) by a minority will not get in. unfortunately this minority can be a rather big.

 

in Culumative voting there  sometimes are regulated limitations to prevent  bulletvoting by limiting the amount of votes each voter can give to a single  candidate, but as said before you first need to agree if bulletvoting is a good or bad thing in the first place.

 

in your given examplewith a rule that every candidate is elected if he has 516 votes:

52 delegates can assure the election of one candidate

9x 52 = 468 delegates (still a minority) can assure the election of 9 candidates

 

RONR does not approve of culumative voting and therefore doesn't provide any rule for it....

Edited December 23, 2022 at 02:38 PM by puzzling
typos

[puzzling]

On 12/23/2022 at 1:56 PM, Shmuel Gerber said:

So I don't think a majority vote carries much significance in this context. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I don't know for certain, but I thought that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality

I think you are right in this in culumative voting in general the top 10 candidates with the highest number ot voted  irrespective of their actual number are elected.

atleast there is no need for repeated elections

but I do think some states prescribe culumative voting for stock companies in their laws.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

On 12/23/2022 at 6:56 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

But the whole point of it is that "A minority group, by coordinating its effort in voting for only one candidate who is a member of the group, may be able to secure the election of that candidate as a minority member of the board."

So I don't think a majority vote carries much significance in this context. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I don't know for certain, but I thought that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality. 

It allows people to pool their votes to get a majority.  It is very similar to approval voting in that respect, a majority is still required in approval which the organization presently uses.  

 

[Josh Martin]

On 12/23/2022 at 7:56 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

But the whole point of it is that "A minority group, by coordinating its effort in voting for only one candidate who is a member of the group, may be able to secure the election of that candidate as a minority member of the board."

So I don't think a majority vote carries much significance in this context. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I don't know for certain, but I thought that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality. 

While I agree that it is quite likely correct "that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality," and a society which adopts a rule providing for cumulative voting may well wish to adopt a rule that the election is determined by plurality vote, I do not think that adopting cumulative voting automatically means that the voting threshold changes to a plurality vote. I believe some societies which use cumulative voting also adopt a compromise method in which candidates are elected by plurality, however, the candidate must meet some specified threshold for election (for example, 25%).

I would note that, even if the voting threshold remains a majority of the ballots cast, it is still the case that a minority may be able to coordinate its efforts to secure the election of that candidate, since members can each vote for one person multiple times. So a person's name could be listed on fewer than a majority of the ballots, but the number of votes cast for that person is a majority of the ballots cast.

So I suppose I would agree that there is a need for some modification to the usual rule. I would suggest that, if an organization's bylaws provide for cumulative voting and are otherwise silent on this matter, the rule for election would be as follows:

• The numerator is the number of total votes a candidate receives.
• The denominator is the number of non-blank ballots cast.
• Based upon this calculation, the number of votes the candidate received must be a majority of the ballots cast in order for the candidate to be elected.

Edited December 23, 2022 at 03:52 PM by Josh Martin

[Atul Kapur]

On 12/23/2022 at 9:33 AM, puzzling said:

atleast there is no need for repeated elections

What if there is a tie for the last position?

[puzzling]

On 12/23/2022 at 3:46 PM, Atul Kapur said:

What if there is a tie for the last position?

okay almost (except in the case of a tie or ties for the last position) there is no need for a repeated elections.

[puzzling]

On 12/23/2022 at 3:04 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos said:

It allows people to pool their votes to get a majority.  It is very similar to approval voting in that respect, a majority is still required in approval which the organization presently uses.  

 

There are very important differences between RONR (majority approval) and culumative voting.

in approval voting you may vote /approve of as many different candidates as you like (even vote for all candidates if you like)

in culumative voting you have a certain number of votes that you may allocate to one or more candidates. 

in culumative voting minorities have a big chance to elect a candidate.

in RONR (majority approval voting ) a majority rules , a majority can elect the complete board, even big minorities can be set aside by the majority.

Which system is better is a matter of what your objectives are.

broad representation of members and a maybe divided board use culumative voting.

every boardmember being approved by at least a majority of the voters use the RONR method.

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I fully understand the differences.   I am the National Secretary of the Libertarian Party USA and serve on a Policy Committee for an advocacy group for alternative voting methods in public elections.  My only purpose in this thread was to confirm an answer I gave to a member who is thinking of a bylaws proposal and had a brain fog moment - Most of my time in alternative voting methods is spent in IRV.

Edited December 23, 2022 at 05:41 PM by Caryn Ann Harlos

[puzzling]

On 12/23/2022 at 3:46 PM, Josh Martin said:

While I agree that it is quite likely correct "that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality," and a society which adopts a rule providing for cumulative voting may well wish to adopt a rule that the election is determined by plurality vote, I do not think that adopting cumulative voting automatically means that the voting threshold changes to a plurality vote. I believe some societies which use cumulative voting also adopt a compromise method in which candidates are elected by plurality, however, the candidate must meet some specified threshold for election (for example, 25%).

I would note that, even if the voting threshold remains a majority of the ballots cast, it is still the case that a minority may be able to coordinate its efforts to secure the election of that candidate, since members can each vote for one person multiple times. So a person's name could be listed on fewer than a majority of the ballots, but the number of votes cast for that person is a majority of the ballots cast.

So I suppose I would agree that there is a need for some modification to the usual rule. I would suggest that, if an organization's bylaws provide for cumulative voting and are otherwise silent on this matter, the rule for election would be as follows:

• The numerator is the number of total votes a candidate receives.
• The denominator is the number of non-blank ballots cast.
• Based upon this calculation, the number of votes the candidate received must be a majority of the ballots cast in order for the candidate to be elected.

whatever system you use there will be some paradoxical outcomes, complications or even counting difficulties.

let alone writing down the rules and how they must be applied. (harder yhan it looks)

you seem to suggest (correct me if I am wrong) 

to be elected a candidate needs to be selected on at least 1/4 of the ballots and a total of votes of at least 1/2 of the ballots, but you forgot to mention how many votes the voters have to play with. if it is low there is a real chance that no candidate will  be elected, if it is high there will be candidates that reach the number of votes needed but not the number of ballots.

[Atul Kapur]

On 12/23/2022 at 12:38 PM, puzzling said:

you seem to suggest (correct me if I am wrong) 

to be elected a candidate needs to be selected on at least 1/4 of the ballots and a total of votes of at least 1/2 of the ballots,

I don't believe that @Josh Martin was suggesting to apply both criteria together. The 25% threshold was an example of what he's seen. 

The majority of ballots cast is his suggestion.

[Gary Novosielski]

On 12/23/2022 at 2:10 PM, Atul Kapur said:

I don't believe that @Josh Martin was suggesting to apply both criteria together. The 25% threshold was an example of what he's seen. 

The majority of ballots cast is his suggestion.

And to be clear, it was a majority, i.e., more than half, not at least half.

[puzzling]

in Culumative voting especially if voters gets many votes in is not difficult to get more votes than half of the ballots.

in fact if X voters each get n votes  X/2n +1 voters have reached a majority vote level. (and X/n+1 guarantee the election of a candidate)

[J. J.]

On 12/23/2022 at 8:56 AM, Shmuel Gerber said:

But the whole point of it is that "A minority group, by coordinating its effort in voting for only one candidate who is a member of the group, may be able to secure the election of that candidate as a minority member of the board."

So I don't think a majority vote carries much significance in this context. I'm slightly embarrassed to admit that I don't know for certain, but I thought that cumulative voting is generally determined by plurality. 

I don't know how much of a difference it would make.  Out of 1030 voters it would take 52 of them to reach the majority vote threshold.  I'm not certain that this would be enough to be in the top ten, without having to go to a second round of balloting.

Someone suggested adopting rules for this; I think for officers it would have to be authorized in the bylaws. 

[puzzling]

On 12/23/2022 at 8:21 PM, J. J. said:

I don't know how much of a difference it would make.  Out of 1030 voters it would take 52 of them to reach the majority vote threshold.  I'm not certain that this would be enough to be in the top ten, without having to go to a second round of balloting.

Someone suggested adopting rules for this; I think for officers it would have to be authorized in the bylaws. 

Yes , you would need 104 voters (still less than 11% of the votership) to secure a place for their candidate in the top ten. 

and yes it all needs to be spelled out in the bylaws.

[Josh Martin]

On 12/23/2022 at 11:38 AM, puzzling said:

to be elected a candidate needs to be selected on at least 1/4 of the ballots and a total of votes of at least 1/2 of the ballots, but you forgot to mention how many votes the voters have to play with. if it is low there is a real chance that no candidate will  be elected, if it is high there will be candidates that reach the number of votes needed but not the number of ballots.

I am not suggesting anything. What voting system to use will be up to the assembly to decide for itself. Nothing I have said should be taken as an endorsement of cumulative voting or a suggestion as to what procedures an organization should adopt in its bylaws if it wishes to use cumulative voting. I was simply trying to answer the original question, which I understood to be: "If an organization has adopted the use of cumulative voting in its bylaws, then in the absence of any other rules on this matter, how are those votes counted?"

In my view, the answer to this question is as follows:

• The numerator is the number of total votes a candidate receives.
• The denominator is the number of non-blank ballots cast.
• Based upon this calculation, the number of votes the candidate received must be a majority of the ballots cast in order for the candidate to be elected.

As to the question of how many votes members may cast, in the absence of any rule to the contrary, members may cast a number of votes equal to the number of positions to elect, and may distribute those votes as they see fit. RONR explicitly states as much.

"For ballot or roll-call elections of boards, committees, delegates, or other positions held by more than one individual, the bylaws may provide for cumulative voting. In this form of voting, each member is entitled to cast one vote for each position, so that if, for example, three directors are to be elected, each member may cast three votes. These votes may all be cast for one, two, or three candidates, as the voter chooses." RONR (12th ed.) 46:43

The discussion pertaining to plurality was in response to Mr. Gerber's question that, generally, organizations using cumulative voting require a plurality. I agreed with this observation and also mused over the possibility of other possible rules an organization might adopt. This is separate and apart from the discussion of what the rules in RONR provide for cumulative voting.