Beauty, Morality, God, and a Table

[Angrboda]

The principle of insufficient reason says that, given no way to tell the answers apart other than by name, we assign equal probability to each.  The odds of the seven people being wrong is less than the odds of the three people being wrong, so the three people are the most likely to be wrong.

Doesn't that assume:
a) Beauty and morality are things which statements about can, in fact, be true/false?
b) There is literally zero other information available (like all the arguments for the existence of God, or the opinions of all other people in the world, and so on)?

It's a hypothetical, thus a and b are moot. If we're talking about something other than a hypothetical then the principle of insufficient reason may not apply. Additionally, assigning truth values to things that have none is also being wrong.