[EM] the "meaning" of a vote (or lack thereof)

[Kevin Venzke]

Hi,

It seems to me all Warren is saying is that a more practical definition
of meaning would be a practical one. Arrow doesn't care about whether
the definition is practical, and as you'd then expect it doesn't happen
to be all that practical.

The Arrow/Tideman view doesn't even care what the election method is.
With the minimal assumption of "top = good" you can aggregate the data
on claimed relative preferences. When you have data that can't be 
interpreted even across two ballots (beyond "they chose to vote like 
this"), and it is proposed to use that data to pick the winner, that 
feels unpleasant.

I'd be the first to say that every election method is basically just a
game. But if it comes in a box with plastic pieces and a spinner, the
electorate may not be willing to try it. The will of the people, and
democratic legitimacy, is serious business.

Everybody's right, basically.

I'd note though that I've never seen a simulation or estimation of
utility that attempted to incorporate any factor other than how happy
people were with the winner. So even if we agree with the primacy of
"BR" as an EM criterion, we don't really know what this advises us to 
do.

Kevin Venzke