# Ranked Choice poll doesn't use min/max settings properly
**URL:** https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372
**Category:** Feature
**Tags:** polls
**Created:** [March 21, 2025, 6:26pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372 "2025-03-21T18:26:24Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@v-maxbraden](https://meta.discourse.org/u/v-maxbraden)
#### Post date: [March 21, 2025, 6:26pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372/1 "2025-03-21T18:26:24Z")
When I create a multiple choice polls I can can set the minimum and maximum number of choices before Vote is enabled, but this doesn’t seem to work for Ranked Choice voting.
If I create a poll with five options:
poll type=ranked\_choice results=always min=1 max=3 public=false chartType=bar
The max=3 parameter seems to be ineffective; a user can still rank four or all options.
The min=1 parameter only works if it’s a 1. If I set it to 2 or more, the poll undoes itself and is just a bullet list.
Maybe this is by design or is an issue particular to the way ranked choice works?
We have a use case where we want users to rank a minimum number of the poll options, and ranked choice is preferable to multiple choice.
---
### Author:  [@sam](https://meta.discourse.org/u/sam)
#### Post date: [March 23, 2025, 10:48pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372/2 "2025-03-23T22:48:23Z")
It feels to me related to ranked\_choice implementation, maybe @merefield has some ideas here?
I am sure we can sort something out here.
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [March 23, 2025, 11:09pm UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372/4 "2025-03-23T23:09:45Z")
Yeah, this isn’t currently supported, but I would definitely _not_ call _that_ a bug.
Perhaps the markdown interface is too permissive and that’s misleading and you might well argue that’s a minor bug. But it shouldn’t be a surprise to people who know instant run-off that this isn’t part of the algorithm.
It’s not really a standard feature of Ranked Choice, Instant Run-off Voting, where the voter has the discretion to select the number of candidates they wish to rank, and can abstain on the others.
Imagine restricting someone on a ballot paper. I guess someone could call your paper spoiled if you rank 4 out of 5 candidates and somewhere on the instructions you were told you could have only 3, but suspect that’s not usual as it would cause confusion and a lot of spoiled ballots which might upset the electorate.
But of course Discourse doesn’t run on paper 🙂
And sure you could definitely add that feature! - it could make sense to limit things to 2 or 3 choices out of 5.
See:
> **[Instant-runoff voting](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instant-runoff_voting)**
>
> Condorcet methods
> Positional voting
> Rated (cardinal) voting
> [@Creating and managing polls](https://meta.discourse.org/t/creating-and-managing-polls/77548/117):
>
> Fair point @meave Author of Ranked Choice polls here, that is a dropped ball. I do not have edit rights to the OP. Very happy for someone to copy this and format as they see fit, or if converted to a Wiki, happy to contribute: Currently works exactly as described here, it’s classic Instant Run-off Voting: (my fork of the poll plugin actually contains that example as a unit test!) Process is as follows: Every voter submits an ordered list of candidates. In each round we only consider t…
---
### Author:  [@merefield](https://meta.discourse.org/u/merefield)
#### Post date: [March 24, 2025, 10:03am UTC](https://meta.discourse.org/t/ranked-choice-poll-doesnt-use-min-max-settings-properly/358372/5 "2025-03-24T10:03:05Z")
To follow up I had a re-look at the build dialogue to refresh my memory.
As you can see there is no misleading setting for Ranked Choice on the form. So the bug is not here. I respect it remains visible on the markdown shell for Polls and that could lead you to believe it might have an effect.
I think this is fairer as a #Contribute > Feature request. Moving it there.
I’d be happy to work on it if hired to do so (I’m not a member of the Discourse team and as a freelancer not paid a salary, time is money … ), consider posting in #Marketplace or PMing me direct for a quote if this is important to you. I’d be very happy to PR if acceptable.