[EM] Comments on Heitzig's utility essay

[Jobst Heitzig]

Warren, when you want to take part in a discussion then please don't 
constantly refer to webpages for which a password is required but just 
post here what you want to say.

As to fairness: I think it should be obvious that a lottery in which 
participants have equal chances to win is more fair than one in which 
the winner is predetermined.

Warren Smith schrieb:
>> In puzzle 36, by "combining", do you mean
>>     
>
> --WDS: I mean: "social utlity: is a function of individual utilities. By combining
> i just mean  to use this function.
>
>   
>> "smooth"?
>>     
> --WDS: smooth means function is continuous, infinitely differentiable, stuff like that.
>
> actually the answers discuss several possible meanings.
>
>   
>> I 
>>     
> guess the most questionable demand, no. 5, is the real clue to your 
> proof, right? So why is it "reasonable" to demand 5? 
>
> --well...  I don't know.  Maybe it isn't reasonable.   The reasonability
> of the axioms is discussed in the answer to puzzle 38..
>
>   
>> I find Axiom 2 of puzzle 37 more interesting. Why should the addition of 
>>     
> some constant be irrelevant then at the same time multiplication with 
> some constant is not at all irrelevant?
>
> --well... read the answer.
>
>   
>> By the way, it would be nice if you posted your "answers" wheny you cite 
>>     
> your "puzzles" since I don't plan to play RV supporter to get a 
> password to see them...
>
> --ah truly, the resistance to gaining knowledge is strong...
>
>   
>> However, the really interesting question is: do you consider fairness a 
>>     
> social good?
>
> --what is "fairness"?
>
> Warren D Smith
> http://rangevoting.org
> ----
> election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
>
>
>