No, I think taking the winner based on total sum score is simpler. So until I see good evidence it is actually worse than choosing the candidate with the highest sum score in a hare quota I am going to stick with it.

There are good theoretical reason to do both. It would seem unfair to the candidate with the highest total sum score to not be elected. On the other hand doing it the other way would result in more total score being spent so in theory more people would be satisfied. I am not sure which effect is better and how often each effect is relevant in the real world.

I think in the end it will come down to which system is more sensitive to free riding and vote management. I think this could only be understood through simulation.

In any case I do not think there are any educated people out there that would argue that either of these systems are inferior to any of the systems currently used in government elections today. I kinda don’t care at this level of improvement. It is just so much better that getting either would be world changing.