[EM] ?MAM better than VoteFair? Steve's 3rd dialogue with Richard Fobes

[VoteFair]

I'm not sure why the message below is specifically addressed to me.

A single-winner method that is based on STV, and does not involve 
"Condorcet pairing," sounds to me like a variation of IRV.  That's not 
something I would find acceptable.

I'll let others express their opinion on this topic.

My specialty is VoteFair ranking, which has both single-winner and 
"proportional" components that are based on what I'll call pairwise 
counting.  (And it involves yet other voting innovations, including 
ranking parties and keeping the number of candidates to a reasonable 
number.)

Richard Fobes

On 10/16/2015 10:59 AM, Richard Lung wrote:
>
> Hello election methods members, Vote Fair,
>
> A while ago, on request by Kristofer, I introduced a method of Binomial
> STV, which, unless extensive testing prove otherwise, should be equally
> applicable to single as well as multiple seat elections, being a more
> general theory of choice, generalising on traditional STV and Meek
> method. It doesnt depend on Condorcet pairing, a points system
> (descendants of Borda method), or premature exclusion (IRV and
> conventional STV).
>
> Yours sincerely,
> Richard Lung.