[EM] "Proxy ranking" versus "proxy approval"?

[Bart Ingles]

I don't think "proxy approval" would be a descriptive name for a method
that splits votes into fractions.  "Proxy cumulative voting" would be a
more appropriate title, since all of the fractions add up to one vote.

If it were known that multiple proxy delegates could not vote for the
same candidate, then true proxy approval would be possible-- each proxy
would cast a full vote for a different candidate.  Otherwise, two
proxies voting for the same candidate would be equivalent to someone
voting twice.


Bryan Ford wrote:
> [snip]
> An alternative would be to take more of a "proxy approval vote" approach: if
> more than one of the proxies on my list actually do vote (or further delegate
> my vote to someone who does), then my vote is split evenly between all of
> them.  Thus in the (hopefully not too common) situation that two of my
> proxies vote against each other on some issue, my vote would be split between
> them and actually "cancel itself out", instead of favoring one proxy over the
> other.
> 
> (Note that the issue of "proxy ranking" versus "proxy approval" I'm talking
> about here is completely separate from and orthogonal to the basic kind of
> election system being used for a particular vote: for example, the "proxy
> approval" approach could be used to distribute proxy votes in an IRV, STV, or
> even simple majority/plurality election, while the "proxy ranking" approach
> could just as easily be used to distribute proxy votes in an election by
> approval voting.)
> [snip]