Pragmatarian Discussion Thread

[The Two Jerseys]

Where does the money go?

To Max Barry

What is the metric for determining the "best" charities?

We all use our own metric.

What do the charities get out of this?

More attention.

Why not just donate to the charities themselves?

[Xerographica]

To Max Barry


We all use our own metric.


More attention.

Why not just donate to the charities themselves?

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

[Xerographica]

To Max Barry


We all use our own metric.


More attention.

You can't have multiple metrics. There can be only one.

Otherwise your system is not a system, it's a hunch.

Is there only one metric when people decide which politician to BV for?

[The Two Jerseys]

Why not just donate to the charities themselves?

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

And how would you do that?

[Valentine Z]

Why not just donate to the charities themselves?

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

For that, I don't know... differnet people has different charity preferences. That doesn't make someone more superior, just that they have differing opinions, differing preference, etc. Someone might donate that $100 to a pet adoption centre instead of to an orphanage, and this doesn't make one better than the other.

As long as their heart is in the right place, I think we should all just donate to whichever charity?

[Salandriagado]

You can't have multiple metrics. There can be only one.

Otherwise your system is not a system, it's a hunch.

Is there only one metric when people decide which politician to BV for?

No, but we aren't after a metric for making decisions for what to vote for. We're after a metric to decide which system has performed best in the experiment.

[Senkaku]

Btw Xero, true preference or not, I'm still waiting for that proof that capracracy isn't infinitely superior to all hitherto conceived political-economic systems, since I believe we've established by now (after so many years lol) that the burden of proving that a system or proposal works lies not with the person making it, but with the people criticizing it

[Dogmeat]

Is there only one metric when people decide which politician to BV for?

No, but we aren't after a metric for making decisions for what to vote for. We're after a metric to decide which system has performed best in the experiment.

Indeed. As I (and likely you as well) have told Xero many times previously. It's frustrating to watch him react to your posts as if this is all new information.

[Xerographica]

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

For that, I don't know... differnet people has different charity preferences. That doesn't make someone more superior, just that they have differing opinions, differing preference, etc. Someone might donate that $100 to a pet adoption centre instead of to an orphanage, and this doesn't make one better than the other.

As long as their heart is in the right place, I think we should all just donate to whichever charity?

We wouldn't force each other to donate to a certain charity. We would simply use DV to recommend/suggest charities to each other.

[Xerographica]

Is there only one metric when people decide which politician to BV for?

No, but we aren't after a metric for making decisions for what to vote for. We're after a metric to decide which system has performed best in the experiment.

Why don't we make a metric for making decisions for what to BV for?

[Bombadil]

Whatever...

So how does giving money to Max Barry divide resources between charities?

It would indicate how we want our community's attention to be divided between charities.

No it wouldn't, it would indicate who has the most money to waste.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You can't have multiple metrics. There can be only one.

Otherwise your system is not a system, it's a hunch.

Is there only one metric when people decide which politician to BV for?

No but there is one metric by which BV evaluates things: by the number of times people vote for that thing.

In other words, BV at least gives us a result for "better" we can all agree on, and this is that which is agreed upon by consensus.

What is your metric of "better", and why should we use it?

[Xerographica]

It would indicate how we want our community's attention to be divided between charities.

No it wouldn't, it would indicate who has the most money to waste.

It's not a waste to help fund our community, just like it's not a waste to help fund our government.

Also...

Justice For The Parkus Empire!

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Why not just donate to the charities themselves?

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

And why would I share your desire to donate to one charity when I might not value the same things you do?

[The South Falls]

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

And why would I share your desire to donate to one charity when I might not value the same things you do?

Some charities would be glutted masses, while others unheard of.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

It's not a waste to help fund our community, just like it's not a waste to help fund our government.

But apparently it is a waste of money when we spend money on shit Xero doesn't want for it to happen.

[Xerographica]

We would decide, as a group, which charities we should donate to.

And why would I share your desire to donate to one charity when I might not value the same things you do?

We wouldn't force each other to donate to any charities. We would simply DV to suggest/recommend/highlight the most worthy charities/causes. Is it possible that there are some worthy causes that you aren't aware of?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And why would I share your desire to donate to one charity when I might not value the same things you do?

We wouldn't force each other to donate to any charities. We would simply DV to suggest/recommend/highlight the most worthy charities/causes. Is it possible that there are some worthy causes that you aren't aware of?

If there were I would have found out already, and even if they were worthy causes I wouldn't give enough of a shit to donate to them because they are not in my list of problems to solve.

[Bombadil]

No it wouldn't, it would indicate who has the most money to waste.

It's not a waste to help fund our community, just like it's not a waste to help fund our government.

Also...

Justice For The Parkus Empire!

It would not indicate the community's wants since the only person who'd contribute is you, and only to 'prove your system, other than a few who'd spend more than you just to spite you.

So it would not indicate the community's wants, just yours and a couple other people.

Much as if we expanded, the greatest contributions would go to the upkeep of roads and security for well off areas.. unless.. unless what you really want is communism whereby we all have an equal allocation given equal pay - but then kind of pointless for your system since they haven't 'earned it' and therefore it's not a true indication.

You've been shown plenty of examples where DV does not have a better outcome than BV.. you state it is always better.. you seem to think it's a problem of our not understanding your theory.. we do.. we've shown examples of where it's wrong, we've explained why it doesn't work and some have had to provide actual realities of how markets and other such things work.. but you have this logical theory that works in your head but not always in reality.. sometimes yes, not always.

Parkus deserved his DEAT. I'm not happy he's gone per se, I remember him as relatively decent back in the day but turning this site into a popularity contest is not a great idea.

[Xerographica]

We wouldn't force each other to donate to any charities. We would simply DV to suggest/recommend/highlight the most worthy charities/causes. Is it possible that there are some worthy causes that you aren't aware of?

If there were I would have found out already, and even if they were worthy causes I wouldn't give enough of a shit to donate to them because they are not in my list of problems to solve.

Personally, I'm sure that there are very many worthy causes that I've never even heard of.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

If there were I would have found out already, and even if they were worthy causes I wouldn't give enough of a shit to donate to them because they are not in my list of problems to solve.

Personally, I'm sure that there are very many worthy causes that I've never even heard of.

And that is your prerogative to go look for them, not for me to spend money in telling you them.

[Dogmeat]

Personally, I'm sure that there are very many worthy causes that I've never even heard of.

And that is your prerogative to go look for them, not for me to spend money in telling you them.

Or, you know, you could even just tell me about them normally. Like people do.

[Xerographica]

Personally, I'm sure that there are very many worthy causes that I've never even heard of.

And that is your prerogative to go look for them, not for me to spend money in telling you them.

Nobody would force you to DV for causes that you care about. Just like nobody forced you to DV for your preferred political system or favorite book.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

And that is your prerogative to go look for them, not for me to spend money in telling you them.

Nobody would force you to DV for causes that you care about. Just like nobody forced you to DV for your preferred political system or favorite book.

Is the main premise of your theory for us to reveal our true preferences, yes or no?

[Xerographica]

Nobody would force you to DV for causes that you care about. Just like nobody forced you to DV for your preferred political system or favorite book.

Is the main premise of your theory for us to reveal our true valuation, yes or no?

The main premise is that DV is better than the alternatives (ie BV) at revealing valuations.