When choosing among alternatives, group members may have various preferences regarding the properties of a solution being sought. Since the properties partially do and partially do not meet their collective wishes, the alternatives are in fact better or worse representatives of the collective will. This idea is implemented in the so-called Third Vote election method aimed at enhancing policy representation, and we show how to use it for collective multi-criteria decision making. To be specific, we consider an example of a committee charged with naming a campus library when neither plurality vote nor Condorcet method nor Borda count gives a unique solution. The committee members have differing opinions, such as whether the library should reflect the national affiliation, be named after a great man, relate to sciences, and so forth. Balancing opinion on these issues, the proposed library names are evaluated and the optimal compromise is found.

在备选方案中进行选择时，小组成员可能对要寻找的解决方案的属性有各种偏好。由于财产部分满足或部分不符合其集体意愿，因此替代方案实际上是集体意愿的更好或更差的代表。这个想法在旨在增强政策代表性的所谓“第三次投票”选举方法中得以实现，并且我们展示了如何将其用于集体多标准决策。具体来说，我们以一个负责命名校园图书馆的委员会为例，该委员会既没有通过复数投票，也没有采用Condorcet方法，也没有采用Borda计数来提供独特的解决方案。委员会成员有不同的意见，例如图书馆是否应该反映国家的隶属关系，以伟人的名字命名，与科学有关等等。