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

[Closed Limelike Curves]

(And empirically, most people never wise up. See: insurance products other
than car, home, and health.)

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024 at 4:02 PM Closed Limelike Curves <
closed.limelike.curves at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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/20240319/7d28f24b/attachment-0001.htm>