My point is that Approval, especially Net Approval, is better than FPTP and is no worse in that respect. Either Approval or RCV is an improvement. The rest is a

My point is that Approval, especially Net Approval, is better than FPTP and is no worse in that respect. Either Approval or RCV is an improvement. The rest is a matter of degree and weighting your priorities. The last few ranks in ranked choice voting go unused or are randomly filled, except that making an explicit ranking of a least favorite candidate requires ranking them all. The first few ranks also may well be random, as the first two or three candidates may all be equally acceptable to a voter. On a ballot with city council for a ward, council members at large, mayor, county board, county chair/county judge, school board, sheriff, constable, state House, state Senate, governor, lieutenant governor, comptroller, secretary of state, land office commissioner, agriculture commissioner, several judges, school board members, US House, US Senate, President, and more that's a lot of ranking and a lot of time to do so. It may no better support the voter's will than Approval after all the effort by the voter and effort to update the counting process. However, some people may well have a strong opinion on where each candidate in a seven-way race belongs in a list. Approval/Disapproval or Net Approval voting, especially with a neutral option, solves that problem of having to support candidates you don't care about higher or lower relative to other candidates that neither RCV / IRV nor FPTP solves. In FPTP, you can choose just one and either Approval or RCV solves that. In Approval you can denote clearly that you approve of any number of candidates, without your first four choices being arbitrarily ranked. You can disapprove of any number as well, without your last choice of disapproval getting ranked right behind your choice for winning the office.