[EM] Proportionality vs utility: Droop quota and feasible points

[Closed Limelike Curves]

Yeah, agreed. Mostly what I'm saying is I'd like us to come up with some
model+meaning for these scores first, then use that model to work out how
to combine them best.

On Sat, Sep 14, 2024 at 2:47 PM Toby Pereira <tdp201b at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> The problem is that we can't objectively determine utilities from the
> scores. We can only make models that make assumptions. I don't think using
> total score in the trade-off is necessarily bad a thing because it's
> something we can easily objectively measure; I just don't think it's
> correct to call it "utility".
>
> Toby
>
> On Saturday 14 September 2024 at 22:39:48 BST, Closed Limelike Curves <
> closed.limelike.curves at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On the topic: I think if we ever find ourselves tempted to make a tradeoff
> between something we're calling "utility" and some other quantity, we've
> defined utility incorrectly. Specifically, I doubt voters' utilities are
> equal to the sum of scores they assign to each candidate. Unlike in the
> single-winner case, I'm not sure how we can interpret the ratings voters
> assign to each candidate. If scores were actually linear and additive, that
> would imply colored voters care just as much about going from 49% of seats
> for their party up to 51% as they do about going from 97% to 99%.
>
> ----
> Election-Methods mailing list - see https://electorama.com/em for list
> info
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20240914/14391035/attachment.htm>