Feature suggestion: the system automatically tells you when you have a https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_paradox situation and offers to decide the outcome based on a coin flip instead.
Only half joking there, the amount of negative results about ranked-choice voting in social choice theory is quite amazing. I'm not sure whether I'd place it on the efficiency frontier of the 'complex but has desirable properties' versus 'easy to understand but far from perfect' trade-off.
In case there is no Condorcet winner, there is actually a more principled way to randomize over alternatives than just choosing each with the same probability, known as maximal lotteries (e.g., https://pub.dss.in.tum.de/brandt-research/fishburn_slides.pd...).
I love this idea: it feels very parsimonious, and it's optimal (in a very narrow sense) by definition. I can't find much criticism of it, though, aside from:
While we're offering troll feature suggestions, I have another:
Add a calculation for how many person-hours such a ballot would have taken if carried out by hand (based on scientifically validated assumptions about how long one person takes to sort through a stack of N votes).
This would also let you give a figure for how much money had been saved by people entrusting their democratic process to an inscrutable and unaccountable online system, and therefore the size of the financial incentive to do so.
Only half joking there, the amount of negative results about ranked-choice voting in social choice theory is quite amazing. I'm not sure whether I'd place it on the efficiency frontier of the 'complex but has desirable properties' versus 'easy to understand but far from perfect' trade-off.