[EM] No. Condorcet and Hare do not share the same problem with computational complexity and process transparency.

[Closed Limelike Curves]

>
> FWIW, I think the dutch book argument is overrated because it assumes
> ceteris paribus :-) That once you've gonne enough trips around the
> cycle, someone won't wisen up and say "no".
>
Ahh, but there's the key: if someone wises up and starts saying "no", the
new decision procedure satisfies the VNM axioms! So, why not just skip the
part where I trick you into giving me a bunch of your money? ;-)

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 5:29 AM Kristofer Munsterhjelm <km_elmet at t-online.de>
wrote:

> On 2024-03-18 07:45, Closed Limelike Curves wrote:
> > VNM-sense means roughly that a 50 is just as good as a 50% chance of a 0
> > or 100.
> >
> > VNM is great--if you put it together with the Dutch Book theorems, it
> > basically gets you to "score voting is the objectively correct voting
> > system" ;-)
> >
> > (Except sadly not if you have strategic voters.)
>
> FWIW, I think the dutch book argument is overrated because it assumes
> ceteris paribus :-) That once you've gonne enough trips around the
> cycle, someone won't wisen up and say "no".
>
> It's true, though, that things would be much easier if we had an
> unforgeable signal of people's utility. Or just interpersonal utility
> comparison at every scale, even if people could lie.
>
> -km
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240319/53cec3ad/attachment.htm>