====================================================================== SOURCE FILE: bv2263_xw23m9_over_50_percent.yaml TABULATED FILE: bv2263_xw23m9_over_50_percent_tabulated.txt ====================================================================== election_title: "BV2263 — Over 50%: single-winner STAR, a candidate with every point on every ballot" election_description: |- Live on BetterVoting (BV2263, election xw23m9). Results: https://bettervoting.com/xw23m9/results BV's STAR tally agrees with LH: winner A, scores 15 / 1 / 0, runoff 3-0, nAbstentions 0, nTallyVotes 3, tieBreakType "none" (no rung consulted). bv_test_id: BV2263 bv_election_id: xw23m9 bv_results_url: https://bettervoting.com/xw23m9/results scenario_description: |- The ceiling case, and the control for reading every other STAR result: what a landslide looks like when it is as large as a landslide can get. Three voters, three candidates. A is scored 5 by all three; one voter gives B a single point; nobody scores C at all. - Scoring round: A = 15 of a possible 15 (100% of the maximum, average 5.0), B = 1, C = 0. A and B advance. - Automatic runoff: all three ballots prefer A. A 3, B 0, Equal Support 0. A wins on every denominator there is — 100% of the maximum score, 100% of the ballots, 100% of the voters with a preference between the finalists. Two things this case is here to show, both easier to see at the ceiling than in a close race: 1. STAR does not stop early. Even a unanimous max-score candidate is put through the automatic runoff; there is no "wins outright in round 1" shortcut the way a majority of first choices ends an RCV-IRV count in its first round. The scoring round chooses finalists, never the winner. 2. "Over 50%" is three different questions. Score share, ballot share and decided-voter share coincide here and only here; they come apart as soon as a ballot rates the two finalists equally. The multi-seat twin is BV1815 (02_STAR_Bloc), whose three ballots hand A 12 of 15 and still buy exactly one seat: the second goes to C on 2 points, after a runoff nobody wins. Read the pair together — 02_STAR_Bloc/01_Learn/over_50_percent.md. voting_method: STAR num_winners: 1 ballots: |- A,B,C 5,0,0 5,1,0 5,0,0 expected_winners: - A # file: bv2263_xw23m9_over_50_percent.yaml ====================================================================== TABULATION RESULTS ====================================================================== === BV2263 — Over 50%: single-winner STAR, a candidate with every point on every ballot === The ceiling case, and the control for reading every other STAR result: what a landslide looks like when it is as large as a landslide can get. Three voters, three candidates. A is scored 5 by all three; one voter gives B a single point; nobody scores C at all. - Scoring round: A = 15 of a possible 15 (100% of the maximum, average 5.0), B = 1, C = 0. A and B advance. - Automatic runoff: all three ballots prefer A. A 3, B 0, Equal Support 0. A wins on every denominator there is — 100% of the maximum score, 100% of the ballots, 100% of the voters with a preference between the finalists. Two things this case is here to show, both easier to see at the ceiling than in a close race: 1. STAR does not stop early. Even a unanimous max-score candidate is put through the automatic runoff; there is no "wins outright in round 1" shortcut the way a majority of first choices ends an RCV-IRV count in its first round. The scoring round chooses finalists, never the winner. 2. "Over 50%" is three different questions. Score share, ballot share and decided-voter share coincide here and only here; they come apart as soon as a ballot rates the two finalists equally. The multi-seat twin is BV1815 (02_STAR_Bloc), whose three ballots hand A 12 of 15 and still buy exactly one seat: the second goes to C on 2 points, after a runoff nobody wins. Read the pair together — 02_STAR_Bloc/01_Learn/over_50_percent.md. --- Runoff (Preference) Matrix --- Head-to-head / pairwise comparison Legend: For - Equal Support - Against * indicates Top 2 Finalist | * A | * B | C | ----------------------------------------------------- * A > | --- |3 - 0 - 0 |3 - 0 - 0 | * B > | 0 - 0 - 3 | --- |1 - 2 - 0 | C > | 0 - 0 - 3 |0 - 2 - 1 | --- | [Condorcet Winner] Condorcet Winner: A — matches the STAR winner [Condorcet Loser] Condorcet Loser: C — loses every head-to-head matchup --- STAR Voting Method (single winner) --- [STAR Voting] Tabulating 3 ballots. Count × A,B,C 2 × 5,0,0 1 × 5,1,0 [Score Distribution] (how many ballots gave each star rating) Score Candidate 5 4 3 2 1 0 | Total Avg A 3 0 0 0 0 0 | 15 5.0 B 0 0 0 0 1 2 | 1 0.3 C 0 0 0 0 0 3 | 0 0.0 [STAR Voting: Scoring Round] The two highest-scoring candidates advance to the next round. A -- 15 -- First place B -- 1 -- Second place C -- 0 A and B advance. [STAR Voting: Automatic Runoff Round] The candidate preferred in the most head-to-head matchups wins. A -- 3 -- First place B -- 0 Equal Support -- 0 A wins. Runoff math: 3 ballots cast − 0 Equal Support (no preference between the two finalists) ─ 3 voters with a preference (majority = 2) A 3 (100%) · B 0 (0%) [STAR Voting: Winner — STAR Voting Method (single winner)] A