[EM] 64 vs 65, post for purpose of annoying Jobst Heitzig

[Jobst Heitzig]

Hi again, Warren.

You wrote:
> Incidentlally, since you claim because you cannot explain the precise meaning of a range vote
> of 64 versus 65, therefore range voting is somehow horribel and inexplicable...
> and you like DMC...  I ask "explain to me the precise meaning of
> `I approve of Bush.'"
> 
> Pretty difficult, isn't it?   

You are completely right! It is difficult, and I have not claimed that I
know a "precise" meaning but rather stated the vagueness of "approve".
However, it seems far easier to ask oneself, "do I find Bush OK", "would
I prefer to live somewhere else if Bush won", or something the like to
decide for or against approving Bush, than to honestly decide whether he
should get 64 or 65 points.

> And also probably strategy dependent - it depends who
> are Bush's opponents, in practice.   All of this is quite analogous to range vote
> values.   (Annoyance mission completed.)

Yes, it is. And since there is already some small difficulty in giving
honest approval information, we should not increase this to a large
difficulty by using even larger ranges.

Jobst