About us

I'm on my way to China again.  And here's the blog: https://deborda.substack.com/p/debordaabroad2

-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-

The de Borda Institute

aims to promote the use of inclusive, multi-optional and preferential voting procedures, both in parliaments/congresses and in referendums, on all contentious questions of social choice.

This applies specifically to decision-making, be it for the electorate in regional/national polls, for their elected representatives in councils and parliaments, for members of a local community group, a company board, a co-operative, and so on.  But we also cover elections.

               * * * * *

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 ... lastpreferences 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!

The story is here.

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. 

Search
Login
Powered by Squarespace
Won by One
WELCOME

Welcome to the home page of the de Borda Institute, a Northern Ireland-based international organisation (an NGO) which aims to promote the use of inclusive voting procedures on all contentious questions of social choice. For more information use the menu options above or feel free to contact the organisation's headquarters. If you want to check the meaning of any of the terms used, then by all means have a look at this glossary.

As shown in these attachments, there are many voting procedures for use in decision-making and even more electoral systems.  This is because, in decision-making, there is usually only one outcome - a singe decision or a shopping ist, a prioritisation; but with some electoral systems, and definitely in any proportional ones, there can be several winners.  Sometimes, for any one voters' profile - that is, the set of all their preferences - the outcome of any count may well depend on the voting procedure used.  In this very simple example of a few voters voting on just four options, and in these two hypothetical examples on five, (word document) or (Power-point) in which a few cast their preferences on five options, the profiles are analysed according to different methodologies, and the winner could be any one of all the options.  Yet all of these methodologies are called democratic!  Extraordinary!

« 2019-35 Indicative (sic) Votes | Main | 2019-33 Moscow workshop on "Decisions..." »
Sunday
Dec082019

2019-34 Chinese film-stars

CHINESE FILM STARS (The first demonstration of electronic voting was in Beijing.)

中国的影星

In consensus voting, we seldom if ever choose only one individual/policy option.  Compromise is the key.  So we always try to vote for more than one candidate/option, and either select more than one individual – a boss plus a deputy, say – or choose a composite policy of the two leading options.

To find China’s most popular film stars, maybe four of them, 18 students were given a short list of the 10 top actors. They were asked to cast their preferences on their smart phones – the programme is on  www.debordavote.org  – a 1 for a 1st preference, a 2 for a 2nd, a 3 for a 3rd, and so on.

In the count, the lowest preference cast gets 1 point; the one but last gets 2; the two but last gets 3, etc.  So if a voter casts a full ballot, his 1st preference gets 10 points, his 2nd gets 9… but if another casts only six preferences, her 1st preference gets just 6 points, her 2nd 5, her 3rd 4, and so on.

Points per a full ballot                        =          10 + 9 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1           =            55

No of voters                                                                                                                =            18

Total number of points that could be cast                              =          18 x 55            =          990

Maximum score for any one actor (in full ballots)                 =          18 x 10            =          180

Minimum score for any one actor (in full ballots)                  =          18  x 1             =            18

Some people cast only partial ballots, and the total number of points cast               =          815.

The filmstars

影星

Preferences

 

Points

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th

6th

7th

8th

9th

10th

成 龙

Chéng Lóng

8

1

1

4

-

-

2

1

-

1

114

邓 超

Dèng Chāo

1

3

1

-

3

2

-

-

3

2

75

范 冰 冰

Fàn Bīng Bīng

-

1

3

-

2

-

-

2

1

6

53

巩 俐

Gõng Lì

1

1

1

3

1

1

4

1

1

1

75

李 宇 春

Liú Dé Huá

2

2

2

5

2

2

1

-

1

-

100

李 宇 春

Li Yū Chún

-

2

1

-

-

2

2

1

4

2

57

徐 静 蕾

Xú Jìng Léi

-

1

4

-

2

4

-

3

1

1

74

徐 铮

Xú Zhēng

2

4

1

1

1

1

1

2

1

-

94

张 国 立

Zhāng Guó Lì

2

1

2

2

3

1

3

2

1

-

85

张 蔓 玉

Zhāng Màn Yù

2

2

2

3

1

1

1

2

1

1

88

 

Total points cast:

815

                           

 

The second table lists the film stars in their order of popularity.  The winner is成龙.  The next four are fairly close together; then there’s a gap before three actors all on 75 or 74 points; and lastly come the two least popular actors.  But given this gap, it’s probably wiser to say that, for these 18 students, “The most popular actors are the top five: 成龙,李宇春,徐铮,张蔓玉 和 张国立.” 

The filmstars

影星

Points

Place

The filmstars

影星

Points

Place

成 龙

Chéng Lóng

114

1st

邓 超

Dèng Chāo

75

= 6th

李 宇 春

Liú Dé Huá

100

2nd

巩 俐

Gõng Lì

75

= 6th

徐 铮

Xú Zhēng

94

3rd

徐 静 蕾

Xú Jìng Léi

74

8th

张 蔓 玉

Zhāng Màn Yù

88

4th

李 宇 春

Li Yū Chún

57

9th

张 国 立

Zhāng Guó Lì

85

5th

范 冰 冰

Fàn Bīng Bīng

53

10th

 

And the second demo was in Xuzhou.

In Xuzhou, thrre were only eight participants, but they all submirtted full ballots.  And if a voter casts a full ballot, his 1st preference gets 10 points, his 2nd gets 9… but if another casts only three preferences, her 1st preference gets just 3 points, her 2nd 2, and her 3rd 1 point.

Points per a full ballot                        =          10 + 9 + 8 + 7 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 3 + 2 + 1           =            55

No of voters                                                                                                                =              8

Total number of points that could be cast                              =                      8 x 55  =          440

Maximum score for any one actor (in full ballots)                 =                      8 x 10  =            80

Minimum score for any one actor (in full ballots)                  =                      8  x 1   =              8.

The voters’ profile shows who got what.  Gõng Lì, for example, got lots of 2nd preferences, a couple of 5ths, and just one 10th preference.  Now a 2nd preference gets 9 points, a 5th gets 6, and a 10th gets 1, so Gõng Lì gets a total of 5 x 9 + 2 x 6 + 1 x 1  =  45 + 12 + 1  =  58. 

The filmstars

影星

Preferences

 

Points

1st

2nd

3rd

4th

5th

6th

7th

8th

9th

10th

巩 俐

Gõng Lì

5

2

1

58

徐 铮

Xú Zhēng

1

2

1

1

1

2

56

李 宇 春

Liú Dé Huá

1

2

1

2

1

1

49

章子怡

Zhang Zi Yi

1

2

1

1

1

1

1

47

徐 静 蕾

Xú Jìng Léi

1

2

2

2

1

44

张 蔓 玉

Zhāng Màn Yù

2

1

1

1

1

2

42

张 国 立

Zhāng Guó Lì

1

1

2

2

1

1

39

成 龙

Chéng Lóng

2

1

1

2

2

37

邓 超

Dèng Chāo

-

2

1

1

2

1

1

35

李 宇 春

Li Yū Chún

-

2

1

1

1

2

1

33

 

Total points cast:

440

 












So the most popular got no 1st preferences at all!  But because she got so many 2nd preferences, she nevertheless comes out on top.  The other conclusion is that the two top actors, Gõng Lì and Xú Zhēng, are very close; then there’s a gap of 7 points…. and everybody else follows 2 or 3 points behind the next.  So the conclusion of these students is that Gõng Lì and Xú Zhēng are China’s two best actors.

If, however, a plurality vote had been used – (the sort of system which the British use in their elections) – the outcome would have been a draw between Zhāng Màn Yù and Chéng Lóng, two of the least popular film stars!

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend