* * * * *
The Institute is named after Jean-Charles de Borda, and hence the well-known voting procedure, the Borda Count BC; but Jean-Charles actually invented what is now called the Modified Borda Count, MBC - the difference is subtle:
In a vote on n options, the voter may cast m preferences; and, of course, m < n.
In a BC, points are awarded to (1st, 2nd ... last) preferences cast according to the rule (n, n-1 ... 1) {or (n-1, n-2 ... 0)} whereas,
in an MBC, points are awarded to (1st, 2nd ... last) preferences cast according to the rule (m, m-1 ... 1).
The difference can be huge, especially when the topic is controversial: the BC benefits those who cast only a 1st preference; the MBC encourages the consensual, those who submit not only a 1st preference but also their 2nd (and subsequent) compromise option(s). And if (nearly) every voter states their compromise option(s), an MBC can identify the collective compromise.
_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-
DECISION-MAKER
Inclusive voting app
https://debordavote.com
THE APP TO BEAT ALL APPS, APPSOLUTELY!
(The latest in a long-line of electronic voting for decision-making; our first was in 1991.)
_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-
FINANCES
The Institute was estabished in 1997 with a cash grant of £3,000 from the Joseph Rowntree Charitabe Trust, and has received the occasional sum from Northern Ireland's Community Relations Council and others. Today it relies on voluntary donations and the voluntary work of its board, while most running expenses are paid by the director.
_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-
A BLOG
"De Borda abroad." From Belfast to Beijing and beyond... and back. Starting in Vienna with the Sept 2017 TEDx talk, I give lectures in Belgrade, Sarajevo, Istanbul, Tbilisi, Yerevan, Tehran, Beijing, Tianjin, Xuzhou, Hong Kong and Taiwan... but not in Pyongyang. Then back via Mongolia (where I had been an election observer in June 2017) and Moscow (where I'd worked in the '80s).
I have my little fold-up Brompton with me - surely the best way of exploring any new city! So I prefer to go by train, boat or bus, and then cycle wherever in each new venue; and all with just one plastic water bottle... or that was the intention!
In Sept 2019, I set off again, to promote the book of the journey. After the ninth book launch in Taipei University, I went to stay with friends in a little village in Gansu for the Chinese New Year. The rat. Then came the virus, lockdown... and I was stuck.
_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-_/-
|
The Hospital for Incurable Protestants The Mémoire of a Collapsed Catholic This is the story of a pacifist in a conflict zone, in Northern Ireland and the Balkans. Only in e-format, but only £5.15. Available from Amazon. |
The director alongside the statue of Jean-Charles de Borda, capitaine et savant, in l’École Navale in Brest, 24.9.2010. Photo by Gwenaelle Bichelot.
Here's the YouTube, the PowerPoint, and the text of the speech (more or less).
Friday, February 4, 2011 Saturday, January 15, 2011 The Next Scottish Referendum has just been published in Scottish Affairs, (No. 73, autumn 2010).
(See also 2014-12, 2013-15 and 2012-13/1.)
Monday, August 9, 2010 The Guardian published an interview with Tariq Aziz on 6th Aug, and this de Borda response on 9th. They gave it the following headline: "Majority voting and the fate of Iraq."
Wednesday, July 28, 2010 Proportionality without Transference: the merits of the Quota Borda System (QBS) is in the latest copy of Representation, Vol 46 No 2, July 2010: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00344893.2010.485820
Thursday, May 13, 2010 Exciting times, and the Guardian published this letter on 11th May.
Saturday, February 27, 2010 The de Borda submission is here. (See also 2014-12, 2013-15, 2012-13/10/1 and 2011/1.)
Saturday, February 20, 2010 Designing an All-Inclusive Democracy, ed. Peter Emerson, Springer, 2007.
Don Saari has written a review for Social Choice and Welfare: it is on
http://springerlink.metapress.com/content/0530263282623016/fulltext.pdf
Friday, February 19, 2010 The above book, jointly edited by Věra Stojarová and Peter Emerson, is published by Routledge.
Friday, February 19, 2010 Our latest work, the result of an experiment on decision-making conducted entirely - both debate and vote - on the web, is published by EPS. More details on
http://www.palgrave-journals.com/eps/journal/v9/n1/abs/eps200940a.html
A synopsis of the trial is on the following openDemocracy webpage.
Sunday, September 6, 2009 On 7.10.2009, the de Borda Institute hosted an open public meeting in Dublin, to see if the Dail could elect a power-sharing cabinet, with TDs choosing not only those who would serve in government, but also the particular department in which each successful Minister would serve. The original invitation is here.
Participants were split into various groups, one each to represent FF, FG, Labour, Independents, GP and SF. And each group was given a fixed number of ballot papers, in proportion to current party strengths in the Dail: 20, 14, 5, 2, 2 and 1 respectively, a total of 44 ballots. The matrix vote is based on QBS and the MBC. So it was to everyone's advantage to submit a full ballot - i.e., to cast all their preferences - and to do so on a cross-party basis. Thus, in the simulation, groups planned strategies amongst themselves, and then negotiated deals with others.
The outcome was as follows: FF 6, FG 5, Lab 2, Ind 0, GP 1, SF 1 - a proportional, all-party, power-sharing coalition cabinet, a GNU. In other words, the matrix vote is indeed a robust voting procedure, and it all works without any resort to party labels. A full report along with the results are here.
(See also 2012-7 and 2011-6/5.)
