downvoted because you actually said "I would like to do whichever of these two alternatives leads to more utility."

Tim seemed to be implying that it would be absurd for unlikely gods to be the most important motive for determining how to act, but I did not see how anything that he said showed that doing so is actually a bad idea.

When you say that thinking about unlikely gods is not "worth" the computational resources, you are sidestepping the very issue we are discussing.

What? I did not say that; I said that thinking about unlikely gods might just be one's actual preference. I also pointed out that Tim did not prove that unlikely gods are more important than likely gods, so one who accepts most of his argument might still not motivated by "a million unlikely gods".