Rad Plan Profile Selection Voting Mechanism and Method
The chosen voting mechanism will be used 2x per annual cycle, starting with the 2015-2016 cycle. Once to select the short-list of profile proposals. Once to select the final (detailed) profile proposals.
Dates:
- May 11th - Tcon discussion in IHE Rad Planning Committee (See meeting minutes)
- June 1st - Deadline to comment on these proposals
- June 15th - Comments will be incorporated
- June 22nd - Deadline to submit letter ballot (using usual majority rule) on preferred voting mechanism and method (Google Form Ballot will be distributed by email)
IHE Rad Proposed Profile Voting Mechanism (whats on a ballot)
Do not edit this section. If you would like to add comments or clarifications, please do so in the comment section.
- Typically 2 or 3 profiles are selected per year, so it is not our usual “straight up, single winner, majority rules” voting process.
- Two alternatives are proposed for the Profile Voting Mechanism.
- See example tallies for two scenarios for each mechanism - Voting Examples
- 1.) Current Voting Mechanism: Simple Condorcet
- Each voter ranks all choices sequentially (a unique value n for each of n options; highest value to first choice)
- The choices with the highest vote totals win.
- For example, if there are 6 profile proposals, each voter casts a vote from A (highest, worth 6 points) to F (lowest, worth 1 point) for each proposal.
- Requiring all voters to support all choices to some degree has the unfortunate side effect of minorities being disenfranchised bu majorities, since for example the marginal support of a minority for a third choice of the majority (unintentionally) outweighs their support of the minority for their own first or second choices.
- 2.) Proposed Voting Mechanism: modified Borda Count
- Intended to allow reasonably sized minority groups to be represented in the winning choices.
- First select the number of "choices" (x), e.g., 1, 2, 3 or 4 profiles
- Calculate (x-1)**2. That is the points assigned to the first choice. Subsequent choices get half the points of the prior.
- The choices with the highest vote totals win.
- For example, to select 3 profiles, (3-1)**2 = 4. Then, each voter ranks three choices:
- One choice worth 4 points
- One choice worth 2 points
- One choice worth 1 point
Comments
Add your comments by editing this section.
| Your name | Date | Comment | Proposed Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Teri Sippel Schmidt | May 12, 2015 | The modified Borda method requires the number of profiles to be selected is known in advance which is not possible since the TC may not have yet established a percent of effort. | Set, but declare, the number of votes in advance. For long list, set at 4 or 5 votes. For short list set at 3 votes, period. |
| Kevin O'Donnell | May 12, 2015 | Agreed. The method requires us to select the number of proposals a voter may choose. The tally will produce an ordered set of winners. We can take winners until they reach our effort threshold just like we do for Condorcet which produces n winners. | |
| Example name | May 12, 2015 | Example Comment | Proposed Change |
IHE Rad Proposed Profile Voting Method (how ballots are cast)
Do not edit this section. If you would like to add comments or clarifications, please do so in the comment section.
The voting method is how ballots are actually cast.
The plan is to continue holding a Webex to present, understand and discuss the profile proposals. Afterward, voters submit their ballot using a Google form and are tallied by RSNA Staff (Jamie Kontos or Chris Carr).
- 1.) Live voting: Eligible members of the Planning Cmte on the webex vote. Ballots are submitted at the end of the webex.
- 2.) Delayed voting: Eligible members of the Planning Cmte may vote regardless of whether they attended the discussion. Ballots are submitted over the week following the webex.
Comments
Add your comments by editing this section.
| Your name | Date | Comment | Proposed Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Example name | May 12, 2015 | Example Comment | Proposed Change |