[clolege]

Isn't Borda Count just Score voting where you enforce that voters can't give two options the same amount of support?

I would be curious why people would prefer Borda over Score if so.

[wnoise]

Not at all. Score Voting as usually defined is continuous on [0,1]. Rescaling to e.g. [1,5] doesn't change this. Restricting to integers on that does; but if there are fewer than 5 candidates, equivalent rankings can still differ for total scores. It's only equivalent if you pick an integer scale [K, K+N] with N candidates, K arbitrary.

That said, I prefer score, or even approval, as that's what strategic score devolves to, but without huge amounts of information loss.

[clolege]

> if there are fewer than 5 candidates, equivalent rankings can still differ for total scores

I’m having a hard time following, can you give an example?

I’m saying that Borda allows voters to give one candidate 5 points, one other 4 points, etc. and score would allow voters to give as many candidates 5 points, as many candidates 4 points, etc.

[wnoise]

I'm objecting to the statement that they're equivalent if you forbid ties.

This is only true when you have as many candidates as score slots.

[clolege]

> It's only equivalent if you pick an integer scale [K, K+N] with N candidates, K arbitrary.

or [0, K], K arbitrary.

because you can give multiple candidates the same amount of support in Borda if it is 0.

[mnomitch]

I'm not super familiar with score, but the advantage in this scenario is that voters call all input the same way and get borda + IRV + a potential condorcet winner.

If you allowed same scores then you can't do both simultaneously and/or the UX gets really funky.

[clolege]

you can do both simultaneously if you count ranked ballots like an election office would: you throw away all tied rankings, and rankings that come after :)