Approval voting is not very useful for most purposes. Condorcet is probably the best of the bunch by a fair margin where you have to come up with one winner and where you want to minimize strategic voting. I talked my department into it years ago and we used it for anything that called for a faculty vote. It was really quite easy and useful for that and everyone felt that they had a better say in what the end result might turn out to be.
I like approval as with or without strategic voting it drives outcomes to consensus/middle-ground candidates.
E. Can I phone a friend?
I think we are making some great headway here, but if we can, I’d like to circle back to the point you were just making. If you wouldn’t mind can you flesh that idea out a bit more.
But it does not, in one round, produce single winner, generally speaking. Subsequent rounds amount to basically Condorcet type of conclusion, though much harder to get there. If you simply want to have "approval" as a precondition for a winner, you can insert a candidate place holder called "unacceptable". Anyone that loses to "unacceptable" would be DQed, including, potentially, the entire field of candidates.
I think we are making some great headway here, but if we can, I’d like to circle back to the point you were just making. If you wouldn’t mind can you flesh that idea out a bit more.
FIFY
