On the other hand, Forest Simmons has found an excellent way to extend approval voting to multi-winner. Proportional approval voting (PAV) is, in my opinion, better than STV, and not just because it reduces to approval voting in the single-winner case.
Here's the initial thread about it:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/election-methods-list/message/6367
and here's some commentary I had before:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/election-methods-list/message/8744
-Adam
At 03:10 PM 7/7/2003 -0400, Rob Speer wrote:
Does anyone know of any theoretically nicer PR methods than STV? Usually when I see proportional methods being discussed, the discussion stops at STV.
Now, I agree that STV is pretty nice (I live in Cambridge and I'm pretty happy with the system), but there is the fact that in the one-winner case it reduces to IRV, which I rather dislike.
Although the multiple winners seem to avoid some of IRV's nastier cases, it seems that there could be a method with better properties, perhaps one that reduced to a Condorcet method.
Of course I've heard "Condorcet Series" mentioned - just pick the top N winners in a Condorcet method - but of course that isn't proportional; it elects N centrist candidates.
[Incidentally, I've had a heck of a time sending this message. I'm new to the list, and I tried to send to [EMAIL PROTECTED], which gave me a bounce telling me to send my message instead to... [EMAIL PROTECTED] Something is messed up on the Yahoo end.]
-- Rob Speer
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
---- Election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
