[EM] What do you think of "List Approval"?

[Kevin Venzke]

This method just occurred to me.  I don't think there's a major problem with it:

1. Lists of candidates are nominated.
2. Every voter can approve as many lists, and as many candidates within each
list as desired.
3. The most-approved candidate from the most-approved list is elected.

The motivation is that with this, parties shouldn't have to worry about the
danger of too many candidates causing too many voters to bullet vote and spoil
the result.  At the same time, parties aren't given an undue advantage over
independents, because independents can run on their own list and win just
as they could in Approval.

>From the voter's perspective, this method *sort of* lets you indicate a second
or third choice, assuming the candidates within the same list manage to border
on being clones.  That may be an unsafe assumption.

In my "Approval failing Majority in a likely way" post, for instance, I had
B and C holding a majority, but possibly losing the (Approval) race to A.
With this "List Approval," B and C could run on the same list, and the voter
could support B over C as well as {B,C} over {A}.

A question I have is, what would keep candidates from "listing" with candidates
who have nothing in common with them?  The effect of "listing" with someone else
is that the odds of either of you winning increase.  So perhaps candidates
would "list" with any but the most polar opposite candidates.  But even with
the polar opposite candidates, if they don't actually have a shot at winning,
having them along could gain a few more votes for your list.

What do you think?

Kevin Venzke
stepjak@yahoo.fr



	

	
		
Yahoo! Mail : votre e-mail personnel et gratuit qui vous suit partout ! 
Créez votre Yahoo! Mail sur http://fr.benefits.yahoo.com/

Dialoguez en direct avec vos amis grâce à Yahoo! Messenger !Téléchargez Yahoo! Messenger sur http://fr.messenger.yahoo.com