[EM] Borda?????

Dick Burkhart dickburkhart at comcast.net
Mon Jan 6 11:53:17 PST 2014

Except that the restricted Borda that I've described is the best general
purpose voting method as far as I can tell. Sure you can do somewhat better
in particular circumstances, such as when you want true proportionality, or
when you have non-partisan judges, etc. 

BTW, when I've run tests on actual sets of votes from Glasgow, most of the
time Borda, Condorcet, and Approval give the same result! 

Dick Burkhart
4802 S Othello St,  Seattle, WA  98118
206-721-5672 (home)  206-851-0027 (cell)
dickburkhart at comcast.net

-----Original Message-----
From: election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com
[mailto:election-methods-bounces at lists.electorama.com] On Behalf Of robert
Sent: January 06, 2014 11:10 AM
To: EM
Subject: Re: [EM] Borda?????

On 1/6/14 1:52 PM, Jameson Quinn wrote:
> Heh. R B-J correctly says that Borda is a restricted version of Score. 
> But whereas he'd locate Borda's flaw in the "score" part, I'd put it 
> in the "restricted" part.
i do too, Jameson.  Score is bad (how do you score your second choice?) but
Borda is worser because of the restriction.  the difference in preference
between #1 and #2 might be far less than that between #2 and
#3 and Borda does not know nor care about it.  if i hate #2, Borda scores
him/her too highly, and if i like #2 (just not as much as #1), Borda handles
that just as poorly.

there's nothing good about Borda.


r b-j                  rbj at audioimagination.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."

Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info

More information about the Election-Methods mailing list