Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote: > My primary reason for the post (and the change/generalization of STV) is to > find out what makes a good multiwinner method a good multiwinner method, > and thus how to create good multiwinner methods...
This may have no practical utility, and maybe it's been suggested before. (It's only because you speak here in the broadest terms, that I'm even able to follow the thread.) One possible approach is to go dynamic. You let people shift their votes. The results will therefore shift, and with them the constitution of the assembly. If it ever stabilize, then the assembly will be (in some sense) ideally constituted. This will also work in single winner elections. -- Michael Allan Toronto, 647-436-4521 http://zelea.com/ ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
