Yes, there are areas where single-winner methods are more challenging. For example multi-winner STV works better than single-winner STV, and it is easier to collect sincere ratings in multi-winner methods than in single-winner methods. On the other hand the field of study may be wider in multi-winenr methods (a bit like N is more complicated than 1). In multi-winner methods we may have some additional aspects to study and solve like proportionality, geographical proportionality and the computational complexity related problems tend to cause problems. Individual problems may thus be more numerous in multi-winner methods although some individual problems may be more challenging in single-winner methods.
Juho On 3.8.2011, at 19.35, James Gilmour wrote: > Juho Laatu > Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 6:04 AM >> Multi-winner methods are, if possible, even more complicated >> than single-winner methods. > > I disagree. It is much easier to obtain a "satisfactory" (representative, > acceptable) outcome for a multi-winner election than it > is to obtain a "satisfactory" (representative, acceptable) outcome for a > single-winner election. Choosing a method to elect the > candidate who best represents the voters in a single-winner election is the > most difficult challenge in electoral science. As soon > as you elect two or more candidates together, many of the problems disappear. > > James Gilmour > > > ---- > Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
