Does PLACE lead to two-party domination?

I tried to search for a thread that discussed the PLACE system. From what I remember:

  • If your vote in a district is wasted, it can help other candidates as endorsed by that candidate.

For example:
District 1: 4 greens, 2 yellows
District 2: 4 greens, 2 yellows
District 3: 0 greens, 6 yellows

Y3 endorses, say, Y2, so it becomes 4-2, 4-5, and 0-3 (right?) after electing Y3. I think then Y2 gets elected…
From there I forgot what happens… I think 2 yellow and 1 green votes transfer into district 1, and G1 wins 5-4?

What I am not sure of is whether this leads to 2PD. It seems like a bit of Asset: in theory voting for 3rd parties is safe, but I am not quite sure if it incentivizes third party growth like Score Voting does.

No, because it allows for anyone with at least 25% of the vote in a district to win with vote transfers from outside of the district. At worst, you’ll have three-party domination, and you can dial down the vote requirement to, say, 10%, and have closer to nine-party domination.

Oh, interesting. I was actually wondering if there was a system that would encourage three-party domination (specifically: if there are 2 parties then it is easy for a third to get competitive, but if there are 4+ then at least one will naturally die out).

But if you start with a 2PDed state, can third parties safely grow? Intuitively it makes sense, but intuitively it also makes sense with IRV, and we all know how that goes.

IRV is inherently single-winner, though. A PR system, especially one where there’s almost no backfire potential for voting 3rd party, should work for growing 3rd parties.