Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerBW
but you can only have one vote in each category, so being a doctor and a solicitor doesn't get you more.
|
It's still probably OK if you can. The thing you mostly need to be careful of is schemes that allow one person to accumulate *so* many votes that a handful of them end up deciding elections. As long as the system is set up so that nobody can accumulate more than a fraction of a percent of all the votes that will be cast, you've probably still got enough diversity of opinion and coalition options that the system is no more broken than most.
The categories you need to watch out for are the ones where you've implemented an open ended linear scheme but the differences between interest groups don't distribute the same way. Money is doubtless the biggest one - if a dollar buys you one vote, $1 million needs to buy you substantially fewer than a million. And you know even then you can mitigate the problem with the same systems you'd use to prevent any "tyranny of the majority" issues (where the unevenly distributed thing is "population" or "candidate popularity" considering each "minority group" or "party" as a single corporate person with equal interests)