How to Learn About Voting Methods — a reading path¶

Voting theory gets deep fast, and it's easy to get lost. This page is a guided path, from complete beginner to advanced, threaded through this library's own pages — so at every step you can not just read the idea but run the election behind it.

It follows the three-level structure of Marcus Ogren's How to Learn About Voting Methods, used with his kind permission. Where Marcus surveys the whole field (and, transparently, leans toward Condorcet methods), this version walks the same three levels through this repo's worked examples. The two are complementary — read his for the field-wide view and a different preference ordering; read this for the runnable, example-first version.

Newcomer? Read the levels in order. Already know the basics? Skip ahead. For the STAR-specific deep track, see the 101 / 201 / 301 Curriculum.

Our transparency note (in the spirit of Marcus stating his own bias): this is a STAR-centered library, so STAR gets the most coverage. But it works hard to be even-handed — every method here has an honest-limits page, and Level 3 sends you to the opposing viewpoints on purpose. Take the STAR emphasis as where the examples are richest, not as a verdict.

Level 1 — Basics¶

Start here with zero background.

What a voting method even is → a ballot and a count — the one foundational split (the ballot vs. the tabulation), and why "most votes" isn't "over half."
The terminology people trip on → Ballot & Terminology Basics — RCV vs. IRV, scores vs. ranks, what even counts as "ranked."
The problem being solved → Choose-One / Plurality and the spoiler effect.
Two kinds of ballot → scores vs. ranks — the split that sorts every method below.
The single-winner methods, one page each:
Approval — mark the ones you like.
STAR — score 0–5, then an automatic runoff.
RCV-IRV (Hare) — rank, then eliminate-and-transfer.
Ranked Robin — rank, then compare every pair (a Condorcet method).
Multi-winner / proportional → proportional STAR and STV — how representation (not just a single winner) is chosen.

Level 2 — Analyzing and comparing methods¶

Now the tools for judging methods against each other. (Prereq: Level 1.)

Strategic voting → strategic voting across the Equal Vote methods — the four kinds of insincere vote, and when honesty pays.
The classic failure scenarios → center squeeze and the chicken-dilemma / residual vote-splitting.
Simulations & VSE → Voter Satisfaction Efficiency and the favorite-betrayal simulation, built on the repo's Monte-Carlo scripts.
Three notions of "winner" → Condorcet vs. score vs. runoff — why "best" is ambiguous.
The head-to-head comparisons → Choosing among the Equal Vote methods (STAR / Approval / Ranked Robin, even-handed) and RCV-IRV vs. STAR.
Where methods disagree, worked → method comparisons and the paradoxes & whoops collection (read under its reading-these-fairly discipline).

Level 3 — More perspectives¶

Empirical evidence, theory, more methods, and — deliberately — the arguments against the methods this repo emphasizes. (Prereq: Levels 1–2.)

Real-world evidence → the Alternative Vote in Australia (a century, assessed evenhandedly), Alaska 2022, and North Carolina.
The party-system question → Two-Party Dominance — pros, cons, and what changes it, and why proportional (not single-winner) reform is the lever.
Impossibility theorems → Arrow and Gibbard–Satterthwaite (defined in the Glossary) — why no method is perfect, so every choice is a trade-off.
The method zoo → beyond the headline four: 3-2-1 voting, Borda, agenda voting, and the ranked-method family in the Glossary (Ranked Pairs, Schulze, Minimax…).
Opposing viewpoints (read these on purpose):
Each method's honest limits — STAR, Approval, Ranked Robin.
Claims we check both ways — RCV-IRV claims, fact-checked.
Marcus's own guide for a Condorcet-preferring perspective different from this library's STAR emphasis — How to Learn About Voting Methods.

How to Learn About Voting Methods — a reading path¶

Level 1 — Basics¶

Level 2 — Analyzing and comparing methods¶

Level 3 — More perspectives¶

Further reading (beyond this repo)¶

Related¶