RomeoStevens comments on Polymath-style attack on the Parliamentary Model for moral uncertainty - Less Wrong

22 Post author: danieldewey 26 September 2014 01:51PM

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

Comments (74)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: RomeoStevens 27 September 2014 10:37:37PM *  3 points [-]

It seems like votes should be considered simultaneously to avoid complex alliances of the form: I will vote on B4 in the direction you like if you vote on B3 in the direction I like, but this is only possible in one direction WRT time. Having such an ordering and resulting negotiations means that some agents have an incentive to bargain for moving the location of a bill. It seems better to be able to make all such Bx vote for By vote trades. I'm not familiar enough with voting models to know the tradeoffs for a simultaneous system though.

Comment author: owencb 28 September 2014 06:30:47PM 1 point [-]

An alternative is to say that only one of the votes actually occurs, but which it is will be chosen randomly.