Thanks for those links; I'm pretty sure you gave them in the other thread, but I hadn't got back over and looked them up yet. Ah, correct. That was bad (i.e. wrong!) wording. I meant that straight multi-seat range voting (simply taking the top 5 candidates) would result in a cluster of similar (good, not centrist) candidates; i.e. it's vulnerable to cloning by the single-seat winner. (Which might not be a problem if people are more concerned about candidates' personalities than on positions in some issue space, but needs pointed out.) I'll go fix it now.