Unless they expect that all other monks would think similarly, in which case they can take Priority without risk.
[Edit for my own memory: In game theoretic terms, they expect a large amount of utility if they decide to take Priority but others don’t, while they expect a rather larger amount of disutility if they decide to take Priority and others also do. In other words, they experience a utility gain only if they decide to take Priority using an algorithm different from the one used by the other monks. That seems to imply a “contrarian” decision theory, which decides based on the decision theory held by the other monks… but the existence of more than one contrarian would negate the benefit of being a contrarian at all… Needs more thought.]
Unless they expect that all other monks would think similarly, in which case they can take Priority without risk.
[Edit for my own memory: In game theoretic terms, they expect a large amount of utility if they decide to take Priority but others don’t, while they expect a rather larger amount of disutility if they decide to take Priority and others also do. In other words, they experience a utility gain only if they decide to take Priority using an algorithm different from the one used by the other monks. That seems to imply a “contrarian” decision theory, which decides based on the decision theory held by the other monks… but the existence of more than one contrarian would negate the benefit of being a contrarian at all… Needs more thought.]