Sorry, as Jameson pointed out, he has invented a voting method he calls AT-TV which (he claims) 1. obeys a proportional representation theorem 2. in the single-winner case reduces to median-based range voting.
I should update http://rangevoting.org/MedianVrange.html to reflect that. Why haven't I? Partly laziness/busyness, and partly because I do not really understand AT-TV and the theorem it satisfies (which is related). Sorry for my faults. I've been busy working on a different project. Jameson ran AT-TV on a real-world 9-winner election and claimed in that election it gave the same results as STV. Toby Pereira's suggestion for turning median-based-range voting into a PR system is a pretty ridiculous "kludge" but yes, technically, it works. It is kind of a matter of opinion what is a "natural generalization" of median-based range to multiwinner PR, and what is an "unnatural kludge." In my subjective view TP's suggestion is clearly the latter and I suppose that kind of ugly approach could be used to (technically) turn virtually any single-winner voting method into a PR multiwinner method. It is really ugly though and his transformation can distort a voter's preference A>B to B>A, which I would hope a lot of people would find very disturbing as step 1 in any election. I offer no opinion on whether AT-TV is "natural generalization" or "unnatural kludge." I also have little clue whether AT-TV or RRV is better as a voting method. -- Warren D. Smith http://RangeVoting.org <-- add your endorsement (by clicking "endorse" as 1st step) and math.temple.edu/~wds/homepage/works.html ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
