Talk:Quota Borda system

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Elections and Referendums, an ongoing effort to improve the quality of, expand upon and create new articles relating to elections, electoral reform and other aspects of democratic decision-making. For more information, visit our project page.Elections and ReferendumsWikipedia:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsTemplate:WikiProject Elections and ReferendumsElections and Referendums articles

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Usage

Is this being used anywhere? A professional society, at least? Is there a broad body if research behind it? Does it solve a particular problem that other systems don't? It's interesting and all, but it's not clear why it (or Matrix vote) is on the Electoral methods template, and I'd like to remove it.Bennetto (talk) 03:07, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Quota Borda system isn't used anywhere. This system is promoted only by Peter Emerson. This system doesn't solve any particular problem. (The same can be said about the Matrix vote.) A Horse called Man 00:41, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've removed both from the template.Bennetto (talk) 02:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This system does solve some problems. Compared to STV:

- It is easier to count (no multiplications, no fractions; only additions)
- It is easier to explain the counting and the reason for it
- No candidate is ever eliminated (thus a candidate who everyone's second choice and nobody's first choice can be elected)
- there are some minor advantages explained by Dummett in his book.

David Huntley — Preceding unsigned comment added by DJHuntley (talk • contribs) 00:22, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Quota Borda system. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080516104139/http://www.deborda.org/votingsys.shtml to http://www.deborda.org/votingsys.shtml

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:43, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Valid Vote not defined

The article doesn't explain "valid vote." John Moser (talk) 20:45, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]