User:Sid900/sandbox

Efficiency
Quadratic Voting has several key characteristics that make it extremely effective in reflecting how strongly people feel about certain issues. This works in the following way -


 * 1) Voters can buy and apply as many votes as they like to certain positions that they feel deeply about. This is a great way for them to express their views for an issue that close to their heart.
 * 2) There is a set number of voting tokens that a voter can use in a certain period of time.
 * 3) This style of voting is "quadratic" as the total amount of votes payed for by a voter increases proportionately. (N TO N^2)

Comparison with majority system of voting
"By contrast, majority rule based on individual person voting has the potential to lead to focus on only the most popular policies, so smaller policies would not be placed on as much significance. The larger proportion of voters who vote for a policy even with lesser passion compared to the minority proportion of voters who have higher preferences in a less popular topic can lead to a reduction of aggregate welfare. In addition, the complicating structures of contemporary democracy with institutional self-checking (i.e., federalism, separation of powers) will continue to expand its policies, so quadratic voting is responsible for correcting any significant changes of one-person-one-vote policies"

In the current majority system of voting, each person is allotted one vote, which they can cast for a particular candidate over other potential options. The candidate that receives majority of the votes wins. This system has an obvious drawback, which is that an option/candidate can get a small number of votes and still win, as long as it receives more votes than the next best option. This can create dissatisfaction amongst the people, which we can see is leading to a global distrust and apathy for democracy.

Drawbacks of Quadratic voting
"The most common objection to QV using real currency is that although it efficiently selects the outcome for which the population has the highest willingness to pay, willingness to pay is not directly proportional to the utility gained by the voting population. More specifically, the wealthy can afford to buy more votes relative to the rest of the population. This would distort voting outcomes to favor the wealthy in situations where voting is polarized on the basis of wealth. While the wealthy having undue influence on voting processes is not a unique feature of QV as a voting process, the direct involvement of money in the QV process has caused many to have concerns about this method."

Quadratic voting has several advantages compared to the current systems of voting in democratic nations. However, it is not a perfect system. It has certain drawbacks in its framework that make it vulnerable to cheating and collusion. This lack of resistance against cheating could make it vulnerable to things like the Sybil attack. Collusion is also a potential threat to the system, where one might hire multiple people to cast votes for a certain issue. Quadratic voting is also weak against polarization by the wealthy, who can buy and cast more votes than the average voter.

Applications
''"Many areas have been proposed for quadratic voting, including corporate governance in the private sector, allocating budgets, cost-benefit analyses for public goods, more accurate polling and sentiment data, and elections and other democratic decisions. Quadratic voting was conducted in an experiment by the Democratic caucus of the Colorado House of Representatives in April 2019. Lawmakers used it to decide on their legislative priorities for the coming two years, selecting among 107 possible bills. Each member was given 100 virtual tokens that would allow them to put either 9 votes on one bill (as 81 virtual tokens represented 9 votes for one bill) and 3 votes on another bill[ That makes 90 in all. What happened to the other 10?] or 5 votes each (25 virtual tokens) on 4 different bills. In the end, the winner was Senate Bill 85, the Equal Pay for Equal Work Act, with a total of 60 votes. From this demonstration of quadratic voting, no representative spent all 100 tokens on a single bill, and there was delineation between the discussion topics that were the favorites and also-rans. The computer interface and systematic structure was contributed by Democracy Earth, which is an open-source liquid democracy platform to foster governmental transparency."''

In 2019, governments and political parties have started experimenting with quadratic voting. The Democratic majority of the Colorado House of Representatives used quadratic voting to decide the allocation of funds, the Taiwanese Government used quadratic voting to determine the winner of the presidential hackathon, and the German arm of the pan-European Volt Party employed quadratic voting to throw light on the most valued party manifesto. Even blockchain communities have started turning to quadratic voting as a solution for vulnerabilities to decentralized network systems. Younger democracies in the world are seeing QV as an option for general election as well.

Common peoples' lives
With quadratic voting emerging as a strong contender for a change in the democratic system of voting, peoples' lives are potentially going to change. Many experts predict that quadratic voting could give people the opportunity to express their views on allocation of budgets and some policy decisions as well. However, QV is not without its disadvantages. It could potentially play into the hands of fanatics who are biased towards certain issues, which could put the majority opinion at risk. There are also dangers of collusion by the wealthy. That being said, Quadratic voting has the chance to better represent society's opinions and therefore lead to a better form of democracy.

Response to peer review
Since my page does not have any edits, I will be giving some points to myself about how I can edit my own work.


 * 1) My article can use some more sections covering other important aspects of quadratic voting.
 * 2) There is a lack of a decent introduction and conclusion for the article I have written.
 * 3) The flow between my paragraphs is not as smooth as it should be, which diminishes the effect of each section.
 * 4) My references could use additions of official government websites of countries already employing this method of voting.

Anchor link -