[EM] NANSON - Elections to one seat

[James Green-Armytage]

Mr. Gazeley,
	Thank you for writing to the list. I remember your article with I.D. Hill
about sequential STV. Are you aware of Nic Tideman's CPO-STV?
	Anyway, back to your topic. Many of us are aware of Nanson's method, but
it is true that we do not discuss it very often. 
	My own objection to Nanson is the same as my objection to Borda: that
there are no specific utility values for specific positions in voters
ordinal preferences (1st choice, 2nd choice, 5th choice, etc.), and that
Borda seems to assume that there are. I think that the meaning of my
ranking of one candidate only has clear meaning in relation to my ranking
of another candidate: i.e. whether the first is above, below, or equal to
the second. Hence my attachment to the pairwise comparison method, and my
skepticism about any method that uses Borda scores.
...
	I understand that Nanson passes the Condorcet criterion, but do you
happen to know if Nanson passes the Smith criterion? If it does, do you
know the proof? 

all my best,
James Green-Armytage
http://fc.antioch.edu/~james_green-armytage/voting.htm