How Spinder works

TL;DR

You answer statements we wrote. We compare your answers with sourced positions and show the working.

Where AI helped, and where it never does

Spinder was built with a lot of help from AI tools. Here is exactly where.

Where AI helped. AI tools did the research and the first drafts. They searched for what parties and candidates have said in public, quoted it, linked the source and proposed where each position sits on the same five-point scale you answer on. Those positions feed your matches, which is why every one shows its quote and its source. AI tools also drafted the statements and their explanations, the explainer pages and most of the words on this site. They found candidate photos and checked each one against a page that names the candidate. And they helped write the code.

Where AI never goes. Nothing on this site calls an AI. AI never collects or interprets your answers. You answer by swiping fixed cards, and your matches are worked out on your device by fixed rules, set out on this page, that are the same for every candidate and party.

What a person decides. The person who runs Spinder made the big calls: what Spinder collects, what it never does, and when anything goes live. That person also approved every candidate photo that appears ("Candidate photos", below).

Who has checked the positions.

Not yet independently checked. These policy matches have not been independently reviewed. This early-access release uses provisional candidate information. The banner on every page explains these limits. Read the sources and coverage before relying on a match; a source link is not a guarantee that our interpretation is right.

Think a position is wrong? Tell us on the corrections page, with the source. We'll fix it and log the correction.

The numbers we use

These numbers come straight from the matching code, so this page always shows the values your matches use.

Method version

spinder-match-1

Weight of a strong answer

2

Fewest comparable statements before a score is shown

8

Smallest weighted overlap before a score is shown

0.6

Answers needed before matches are shown

12

Tie tolerance (points)

0.5

Lowest score for the closest-match-elsewhere check

60

Points ahead of your best local match needed for that check

5

Shared answers needed to compare with a friend

8

Strong band starts at (%)

75

Middling band starts at (%)

50

Like I'm five

We wrote 18 statements about state issues. You say yes, no, torn, or skip. Strong answers count double. For each candidate, we find what they or their party have said in public, with a source, and work out how closely you line up. If we can't find enough, we say so instead of guessing.

The statements

• Public transport should not be free for everyone in Victoria.

  Less government action · Core

• The law should cap how much rent can go up each year.

  More government action · Core

• New homes should not be connected to gas.

  More government action · Core

• Land tax on investment and holiday properties should be cut.

  Less government action · Core

• The number of state public servants should be frozen for 10 years.

  Less government action · Core

• Victoria should keep building the Suburban Rail Loop.

  More government action · Core

• Victoria should keep its Statewide Treaty with First Peoples.

  More government action · Core

• Victoria's bail laws should be made stricter.

  More government action · Core

• It should be legal for adults to use cannabis without a prescription.

  Less government action · Core

• Teenagers aged 14 to 17 charged with serious violent crimes should be tried in adult courts.

  More government action · Core

• Private schools with high fees should keep paying payroll tax.

  More government action · Core

• Duck hunting should stay legal in Victoria.

  Less government action · Core

• Police should be able to use metal detectors on people in public places without a warrant.

  More government action · Core

• The age of criminal responsibility should be raised from 12 to 14.

  Less government action · Core

• Pill testing should be available at music festivals.

  More government action · Core

• Religious schools should be able to choose staff based on their faith, for any role.

  Less government action · Core

• Victoria should keep its law to reach net zero emissions by 2045.

  More government action · Not core

• Poker machines should stay in Victorian pubs and clubs.

  Less government action · Not core

The answer scale

Parties and candidates are placed on a five-point scale from strongly against to strongly for, with the middle for a published mixed position. If we can't find a sourced position, it stays unknown. You answer yes, torn or no. A yes or a no can be marked strong, which counts double. There is no "mildly agree", so a party that leans your way scores a little under a party that is firmly with you.

The formula

For each statement you answered where we also know the position, similarity is 1 minus the gap between your answer and the position, divided by 4 (the width of the scale).

Your score is the weighted average of those similarities, as a percentage. A strong answer has weight 2 and every other answer weight 1. Statements with an unknown position are left out of both the top and bottom of the sum, never guessed.

When we show a score

A score is shown only when at least 8 of your answers can be compared and the compared answers carry at least 60% of your weight. Otherwise the party or candidate is listed as "Not enough on the record". Nothing is filled in to make up the gap.

Ties, and why there are no rank numbers

Results are sorted by score. Scores within 0.5 of a point of the first in a run are tied, and a tied result carries a "Tied" tag. We never show a rank number beside a name, because a number would suggest a precision these scores don't have. Inside a tie, parties go A to Z, and candidates and groups follow the ballot order once it is drawn, or A to Z before then. Ballot order never means a better match.

Candidates, parties and the Legislative Council

A candidate's own sourced position, when we have one, always wins. Otherwise a candidate for a party takes the party's position, and it is labelled "Party policy", never presented as the candidate's own words. Independents never take anyone else's position, so many will show "Not enough on the record".

For the upper house, a one-party group takes its party's position. A group of several parties has a position only where all of those parties agree. A group of independents has a position where every member with a known position agrees. Anywhere else the group's position is unknown. A match score does not predict preference flows or who wins.

Coverage by party

The closest-match-elsewhere check

It shows only when a candidate running elsewhere scores at least 60% with you, and at least 5 points more than your closest local match, or when nobody local has enough on the record to score. Candidates from parties that run in fewer districts, and independents, can show up here more often, because for most people they're running somewhere else. That comes from where candidates run, not from how we score.

Versions

Method

spinder-match-1

Statement set

Version 2

Statement set digest

8078cc4dfb5d132963c6775fbeef7ce673339c9d3cb9c0a2937fdd5388703fec

Data release

vic-2026-20261103T000000Z-1227203ea473

Names and fonts

Every name is set in the same typeface, at the same size. If a name has a letter our typeface doesn't include, that one letter shows in your device's own font. We never change how a name is spelt.

The map

On the Held by map, some party colours stand out more than others against the page. Every seat gets the same thin outline so none disappears, but the colours themselves aren't equally bright.

Candidate photos

Photos help you recognise the people running in your district. They appear only for lower house candidates, beside their names, all the same size and all in greyscale. Where we have no photo we can show, the candidate gets their initials in the same square. Initials say nothing about a candidate, only that we have no photo of them to show.

We use public photos from pages that name the candidate, such as party and campaign sites, the Parliament of Victoria, news stories and social media posts. AI tools found them, matched each one to a page that names the candidate, and screened it for signs of AI generation or editing. Nothing appears until the person who runs Spinder has approved that exact photo. Some photos were approved on the strength of AI screening. Flagged photos remain hidden unless separately approved.

We crop and resize each photo, and show it in greyscale so no party's colours show up beside a name. We never otherwise change a photo. AI-made or edited faces are never allowed: if you think one has slipped past our checks, tell us, and we'll hide it while we look. Photos don't affect your matches or the order of anything. They load from Spinder's own site, so no other site sees whose photo you looked at. Each photo's credit and source are at the end of the candidate's row, or under the list on district pages.