SoullessAutomaton comments on Aumann voting; or, How to vote when you're ignorant - Less Wrong

11 Post author: PhilGoetz 02 April 2009 06:54PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (36)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: SoullessAutomaton 02 April 2009 11:04:40PM *  4 points [-]

Voting to "cancel out an idiot" is possibly acceptable as a first-order approximation, but sorely lacking beyond that.

Even assuming single-issue voting on a question that is completely linear, if you believe that the correct point is at point X% of the way from A to B, where Y% of the idiots vote towards A and (100-Y)% towards B, a second-order approximation of rationality would mean randomly voting toward one side or the other in proportion to the difference between X and Y such that if X and Y are equal you flip a coin.

Comment author: thomblake 03 April 2009 06:43:13PM 5 points [-]

Indeed - I've considered similar problems with Less Wrong comment voting. If I see a comment that's rated as a 20 and I think it's more like a 5, I'm tempted to vote it down. But I resist the urge because I won't look at it again but there might be 20 people later on that decide to vote it down on its merits, in which case I would want to cancel them out by voting up. So it seems best, when voting isn't one-off and closed, to vote one's conscience.

Comment author: MasterGrape 04 April 2009 08:22:17AM 4 points [-]

Is the problem here our inclination to interpret the number of points or karma as a rating in and of itself? As I understand it, that is just a tally of the upvotes and downvotes.

A 20 isn't four times as correct as a 5. It isn't even necessarily perceived as correct by four times as many people since the total number of votes might be larger for the 5 than for the 20.

So if we see a comment rated 20 and think it's more like a 5, we need to correct our thinking. Because this rating is not a 20/20 or some other percentage. The difference between 5 and 20 isn't necessarily qualitative. Does that make sense?

Comment author: [deleted] 28 October 2011 10:32:53PM 0 points [-]

Indeed. One of the things I don't like that much about the karma system is that I'd consider 5 upvotes and 0 downvotes to be better than 24 upvotes and 20 downvotes.

Comment author: BradTaylor 04 April 2009 07:34:51AM 1 point [-]

Surely, other things equal, your best estimate for future voting is current voting. It's more likely that another 20 will upvote than another 20 downvote. If you're only concerned with the outcome, your best strategy will be to downvote. Of course, you may feel really bad if you downvoted a comment below what you think it deserves, because you were responsible.

Comment author: PhilGoetz 03 April 2009 02:55:02AM *  1 point [-]

That approach would be good if there were a large number of people using this strategy, or if you voted many times on the same issue.

Comment author: SoullessAutomaton 03 April 2009 02:33:04PM *  1 point [-]

if you voted many times on the same issue.

In this case, moving to Chicago is an option.