HackerTube.dev

Animated Voting Methods

Unify The Vote · 15.7K views · 2017-06-16 · 6:18

Open on YouTube ↗

If playback is restricted in your region, try opening the original video. Use Mark watched to add it to your marked videos.

Overview

An animated simulation comparing single-winner voting methods such as plurality, instant runoff and STAR. Colored regions show which candidate wins as a randomized electorate shifts across a two-dimensional political space, building on Ka-Ping Yee's earlier diagrams.

On Hacker News

HN commenters cite it in voting-reform threads as a visual argument that cardinal systems (STAR, approval) beat plurality and ranked-choice voting.

Recommended by 3 HN people across 4 months · HN mentions 2018–2022

Topics

Search by tags

What people said

user234683 · 2019-10 · Strong recommendation

I always recommend this pair of videos when discussing STAR voting vs other alternative systems. The first video is an easy-to-follow explanation of how spoiler effects can happen in both plurality voting and IRV [1]. In the second [2], the guy who created Star voting applies Ka-Ping Yee's methods to Star voting and animates it side-by-side with alternative systems to show its performance. [1] [LINK] [2] [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
godelski · 2021-11 · Recommendation

The first link there does actually compare against ranked choice. It is just called IRV. There's a larger comparison that includes more types of ranked choice (also called "ordinal") here[0]. Though I particularly like this animation[1]. I'll also add that there is a lot of nuance to voting and VSE isn't everything. There's a lot of factors to consider including: how do strategies work? Is it scalable? Can it easily be counted and/or verified statistically? How easy is it for voters? How effective are (strong and weak) spoiler candidates? And many more questions. For the most part cardinal methods (like Approval) fair better on all these accounts. There is a slight tradeoff to VSE. Note STAR in [0] has a slightly lower VSE than RP/Schulz (ranked), but a tighter grouping (better vs strategies). But also STAR is more complex for voters and counting than Approval is (I'd still argue STAR is easier for voters and counters than ordinal systems). So these are the types of tradeoffs you're making [0] [LINK] [1] [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗
nickik · 2021-06 · Recommendation

Ranked Choice Voting is not really a good idea. It has very strange unintuitive behavior. Doing Score based voting is just much better and arguably simpler and less work. I specially like the Star-Voting, where they do a runoff at the end to cover some extra cases. They also have a few variants for multi-winner and representational voting. Its also much more familiar for people from real live, like online review. [LINK] P.S: Wow a lot of down-votes. RCV is just the alternative that got the most marketing, but once you start looking into the different systems I really don't understand people can stick with RCV just because its slightly better then the system before. If you are gone invest all this effort in improving the system, why not go to something easier and objectively better. This video shows the issue very well (one of the people involved in Star voting made it): [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗

Sources

Video by Unify The Vote, played through YouTube.

Data and selection notes

HN summaries and labels may contain AI errors. HN dates refer to discussions, not video publication.

HN Library: HackerTube export (2026-10-31) and open-index/hacker-news. Upstream summaries and classifications may contain AI errors.

Views, duration and playback status refresh separately from the published catalog. When an update fails, existing data remains visible.

Selection checks
  • SaaS & AI candidates: Topic keywords do not match
  • Editor-approved picks: Editorial review is required

Rule matches identify candidates. They do not guarantee video quality or financial results.

About the library and its sources