In PR, how does the electorate vote out an individual candidate that you don't like? It seems weird that support for a party implies support for all candidates fielded by that party.
The list you vote for determined how many seats that list (party) get in each region, but striking names or adding names of people on other lists alters the order in which seats will get allocated to the people on the lists.
It is not very often used, but when particularly controversial candidates are fielded it sometimes does affect who gets in.
Better vote for another party instead.
With the party-list system, you generally vote for parties and not for persons.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/may/08/defeat-ed-ba...
If you look at the Australian model, you actually can do this. You can either vote above or below the line (forget which is which), with one you vote for the list the party derived, the other you select the party and then rank all of their candidates. In practice thou the majority don't rank and it is sort of irrelevent that you can.
IMHO, even with individual candidates it is more or less the party they represent that decides the winner anyway.
For the lower house, we have optional preferential voting. So you number from 1 to something, and stop when you want. Then a slightly complex counting system occurs where votes for least-voted candidates are redistributed to the next preference, and repeated until you get a result.
The upper house voting system does have some issues though. Most people consider voting below the line complex, and you can only mark one party above the line. Then independent senators only appear below the line, since they are in no party (which has caused an independent senator to make a party, just to appear above the line).