[EM] What is the name of this simplest STV multi-winner method?

[robert bristow-johnson]

I forgot to mention that there is some discussion about using RCV to elect 2 or 3 in Burlington and in Vermont.  Most people's eyes glaze when I mention something like Hare-Clark or Gregory.  These persons (some are policy makers that are promoting RCV) are saying it's just like IRV but we stop at 2 (or 3) remaining candidates.  Nothing about surplus votes and nothing about fractional votes.  And I realize that not all PR methods use fractional votes, but I think there is no good reason not to.  It's just that only surplus votes might become fractional, not from being transferred from eliminated candidates.

--

r b-j . _ . _ . _ . _ rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

.
.
.

> On 11/25/2022 7:54 PM EST robert bristow-johnson <rbj at audioimagination.com> wrote:
> 
>  
> Okay guys, I never used the word "proportional" or "PR".
> 
> I know "STV" is commonly equated to "multi-winner RCV" by the same folks who equate "RCV" and "IRV".  I still think "STV", given the root meaning of the phrase, is applicable in semantic.  I know I am resisting a pre-established convention, but if the RCV method is in sequential rounds where individual votes were being transferred from one candidate to another, it's STV in my semantic.  This convention I dislike less than when FairVote (and some jurisdictions) adopted "RCV" to mean only Hare STV.
> 
> Thanks, Jack, for the doi link.
> 
> And thanks everyone for the semantic help.
> 
> Never said it was "PR", but I still say it's semantically more accurate to say it's "STV" even if that is not the convention of practice.
> 
> And Ken B, I'm getting right back to you.
> 
> Thank y'all.