Examples include publicly-traded companies (which typically grant stockholders one vote for each share they own), as well as the European Council, where the number of votes of each member state is roughly proportional to the square root of the population.
[1] The Roman assemblies provided for weighted voting after the person's tribal affiliation and social class (i.e. wealth).
In Sweden, universal and equal male suffrage to the lower house (Andra kammaren) was introduced by Arvid Lindman's first cabinet, while voting for city and county councils, which indirectly decided the composition of the upper house (Första kammaren), was graded along a 40-degree scale.
Weighted voting was abolished in Nils Eden's reforms of 1918-19, when female suffrage was also introduced.
[3] After 1946 and the Brazzaville Conference of 1944, French colonial authorities set up a system of double collège where the local population would be divided in two electoral colleges, both returning the same numbers of delegates, the first being composed by French citizens and évolués and the second by natives with indigenous status.
Under its 1961 Constitution, the British colony of Southern Rhodesia provided for a special form of weighted voting called cross-voting.
In 1969, cross-voting was abolished altogether in favor of a de jure segregationist weighted voting system, in which the A roll (electing 50 seats) was reserved for Europeans, Coloureds and Asians meeting higher property and education requirements, and the B roll (electing eight seats) reserved for Africans meeting lower property and education requirements.
[4] When considering motions, all reasonable electoral systems will have the same outcome as majority rules.
A player is typically considered a dictator if their weight is equal to or greater than the quota.
However, more detailed analysis typically finds that larger states have more power than implied by their number of electors, making the system as a whole biased towards larger states (unlike a simple popular vote).