[EM] List PR

Forest Simmons fsimmons at pcc.edu
Fri Jun 15 12:00:11 PDT 2001

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, LAYTON Craig wrote:


> The other option is STV (or PAV) in districts, but I've not yet decided
> whether this is a better idea than list PR.  David Catchpole had an
> interesting idea a few months ago with a PR/Condorcet model, but I didn't
> follow all of it.
> Craig

PR by districts might give the geographical grounding that we are used to
here in the states, with local accountability.  It might alleviate some of
the bloc voting problem, too, if more candidates can run run as
independents or with more local allegiance than party allegiance. 

I must have missed David Catchpole's PR/Condorcet idea.  I haven't had any
luck in trying to devise such a system myself.

It seems to me that when the Smith set has several candidates, then
different candidates are preferred by essentially different majorities, so
there should be some way of taking advantage of this to get multiple
winners, with everyone happy because of overlapping majorities being

So for multiwinner elections not having a CW might be an advantage.

[I didn't get much farther than that in thinking about PR/Condorcet.]

If there were a nice PR/Condorcet method, perhaps it would generalize to
Dyadic Approval.

Maybe we should start with sequential Dyadic Approval and work backwards.


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list