What I am confident you do not understand is that excluding wannabe accomplices to Armageddon from the set of agents given to a CEV implementation does not even rule out (or even make unlikely) the resultant outcome taking into consideration all the preferences of those who are not safe to include (and just ignoring the obnoxiously toxic ones).

I barely understand this sentence. Do you mean: Excluding "jerks" from CEV does not guarantee that their destructive preferences will not be included?

If so, I totally do not agree with you, as my opinion is: Including "jerks" in CEV will not pose a danger, and saves the trouble of determining who is a "jerk" in the first place.

This is based on the observation that "jerks" are a minority, an opinion that "EV-jerks" are practically non-existent, and an understanding that where a direct conflict exist between EV of a minority and EV of a majority, it is the EV of a majority that will prevail in the CEV. If you disagree with any of these, please elaborate, but use a writing style that does not exceed the comprehension abilities of an M. Eng.