[EM] Interpreting Balinski's MJ words

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

On 01/04/2017 01:45 PM, Kristofer Munsterhjelm wrote:
> On 01/03/2017 08:44 PM, steve bosworth wrote:
>> To EM:
>>
>> Please check the following [clarifications or corrections written within
>> the square brackets].  Currently I see these suggestions as more clearly
>> expressing B&L’s own intentions in the following two extracts from M.
>> Balinski and R. Laraki (2011) /Majority Judgment/, MIT.  Please explain
>> if you think I have misunderstood these paragraphs:
>>
>> p.14:
>>
>> Similar reasoning shows that the majority-grade mechanism is /group/
>>
>> /strategy-proof-in-grading/.  A group of voters who share the same
>> beliefs (e.g.
>>
>> they belong to the same political party) has the same optimal strategy,
>> namely, to
>>
>> give to the candidates the grades it believes they merit. For if the
>> group believed
>>
>> that Royal merited better than /Good/, and all raised the grade they
>> gave her,
>>
>> her majority-gauge would remain the same (/p /does not change) [her
>> majority-gauge would probably only be changed insignificantly when
>> thousands are voting (/p would/ probably only be changed
>> insignificantly)]. If all lowered
>>
>> the grade they gave her, her majority-gauge would decrease (/q
>> /increases), and
>>
>> perhaps her majority-grade would be lowered (not their intent). If
>> [instead] the group
>>
>> believed that Royal merited worse than /Good/, and all lowered the grade
>> they
>>
>> gave her, her majority-gauge would remain the same (/q /does not change)
>> [her majority-gauge would probably only be changed insignificantly when
>> thousands are voting (q/would/ probably only be increased
>> insignificantly)]. If [instead] all
>>
>> raised the grade they gave her, her majority-gauge would increase (/p
>> /increases),and perhaps her majority-grade would be raised (not their
>> intent).
> 
> Basically, you're right.

I should clarify what I meant by that.

You're right that the voters can only very rarely change the outcome.
But the point beyond this observation is, as I said, that even when they
can, it's detrimental for them to do so.

That is assuming they're strategizing in grades, i.e. want Royal to get
a Good rather than Royal to win.