[EM] Campaign issue: wv vs m

[Martin Harper]

MIKE OSSIPOFF wrote:

> And remember that exactly equal-rated candidates isn't common when
> people know things about all the candidates. There may be some
> candidates between whom I don't bother expressing preferences. But
> then it's my equal ranking of them that's insincere, by laziness.

If I give candidate A a utility of 0.5 +/- 0.1, and candidate B a utility of
0.49 +/- 0.1, am I being insincere if I do not rank A over B? Personally I
would rank A over B because it would marginally increase my expected outcome
{assuming that the method is a sensible one}, but I don't think it's right
to penalise people who do not make that decision.

It gets worse than that when you consider the problem whereby a voter with
A=1, B=0 has as much weight in the A>B contest as one with A=0.55, B=0.45 -
a minor preference can cancel out a major preference. By refusing to express
a minor preference due to uncertainty or laziness, surely such voters are
helping to produce a better winner at the end of the day? Surely they should
be applauded for that, in the same way that we would applaud those who give
sincere ratings in CR rather than strategising like crazy?