View Poll Results: What is your proposal?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • $100 to me, $0 to player B

    4 7.02%
  • $99 to me, $1 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $90 to me, $10 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $80 to me, $20 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $70 to me, $30 to player B

    2 3.51%
  • $60 to me, $40 to player B

    7 12.28%
  • $50 to me, $50 to player B

    36 63.16%
  • $40 to me, $60 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $30 to me, $70 to player B

    0 0%
  • $20 or less to me, $80 or more to player B

    0 0%
Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 134

Thread: Hypothetical: $100 Game

  1. #111
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    What is the basis for you not to believe what we're telling you? I have no motivation whatsoever do accept the 100/0 offer. None. In fact, I *only* have motivation NOT to accept it.
    To take it a step further, I believe it's easier to say that we'd deny person A the $100, but if we had the chance, we'd give it to him. That's just what I believe most people would do. I could of course be wrong. But that's my belief.

  2. #112
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    Have you read the convo's between Mega, Tucker and myself? It's all explained there. It comes down to the fact that I think people should expect people to be greedy and that isn't immoral of those who choose to be greedy. That society is happier not sacrificing for the 'good of the pack' and instead, taking what they can, as this is natural to them IMO,under the rules that they don't cheat, lie, murder, etc. They (and I assume you) believe that as a member of society, if you see a way to distribute wealth without having to give any present value up, you should for the good of the pack and if you don't, then you should be punished. It's just a difference in what we call ideal societies.

    I beliieve that most members of society do (or should) expect person A to take as much as he can - to maximize profit. And so with that expectation, a member of society as person B should allow person A his profit since he didn't break any rules of the society (that I promote) of cheating, lying, murdering, etc. He earned it via the rules of the game and I as person B will allow it.
    Yeah, I read your convo. And what you say makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. I don't expect people to be greedy and mean. Just because you do, doesn't mean the rest of do or that we're lying about it. I will not reward someone behaving in a manner that I personally feel is asshole-ish. And, I believe that offering 100/0 is the mark of a complete twat. I would refuse to reward that. I have no motivation whatsoever to reward a behavior I find personally appalling. In fact, I have a lot of motivation to punish said behavior.

    Not sure why you think we'd be lying about that.

  3. #113
    Doesn't go below juicy
    tacomancer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Cleveland
    Last Seen
    05-20-16 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    31,781

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    Have you read the convo's between Mega, Tucker and myself? It's all explained there. It comes down to the fact that I think people should expect people to be greedy and that isn't immoral of those who choose to be greedy. That society is happier not sacrificing for the 'good of the pack' and instead, taking what they can, as this is natural to them IMO,under the rules that they don't cheat, lie, murder, etc. They (and I assume you) believe that as a member of society, if you see a way to distribute wealth without having to give any present value up, you should for the good of the pack and if you don't, then you should be punished. It's just a difference in what we call ideal societies.
    Less ideal society and more recognition of human instinct. People are both self maximizers and social and any free society is going to attempt to find balance between the two.

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    I beliieve that most members of society do (or should) expect person A to take as much as he can - to maximize profit. And so with that expectation, a member of society as person B should allow person A his profit since he didn't break any rules of the society (that I promote) of cheating, lying, murdering, etc. He earned it via the rules of the game and I as person B will allow it.
    I would say that you have met some very different people than I have throughout life. Almost everyone I know has some notion of fairness.

  4. #114
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    To take it a step further, I believe it's easier to say that we'd deny person A the $100, but if we had the chance, we'd give it to him. That's just what I believe most people would do. I could of course be wrong. But that's my belief.
    PFFFFTTTT... Think again, bucko. I'd give him the middle finger. "Deal or no deal??" NO DEAL!

    I don't say things I don't mean.

  5. #115
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by megaprogman View Post
    Less ideal society and more recognition of human instinct. People are both self maximizers and social and any free society is going to attempt to find balance between the two.



    I would say that you have met some very different people than I have throughout life. Almost everyone I know has some notion of fairness.
    Good clarification on ideals vs recognition of human instinct. And to clarify - I strongly support fairness. If someone breaks the rules of society - if they cheat, lie, steal, etc. They should be punished! And please don't get me wrong, I'm a very giving person. But, as I explained yesterday in other messages, when I ask myself why, it's because of morals. Because I want to be moral and have a desire to fill these morals. I hope all people have that desire. But I believe the fulfill those morals because the reprucussions of not fulfilling those morals are you feeling like a bad person. And so I do it for me is my conclusion. If I were indifferent to morals, I wouldn't do anything good unless it happened to benefit me. But this is not the case. And so I assume that the reason I do it is for me. You believe we are moral because it is human nature to be moral. I disagree. I think it's human nature to know what morals are, but we choose to be moral for ourselves. Because it feels good or at least doesn't make us feel bad for not being moral.

    Anyway, bringing this back to the topic - I don't think it's immoral to expect someone to maximize their potential profits so long as they aren't immoral. That is to say, aren't stealing, cheating, lying, etc. If they follow those rules, I would allow it.

  6. #116
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    PFFFFTTTT... Think again, bucko. I'd give him the middle finger. "Deal or no deal??" NO DEAL!

    I don't say things I don't mean.
    you make me laugh. Not at you, but with you. That's fine. If that makes you happy, that's what you should do. But I don't think that's what makes most people happy - that's just my opinion. I think most people would still want to make another happy even if that person didn't extend a hand to them. (though from my view, they didn't take anything from them either)

  7. #117
    Advisor
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    358

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Yeah, I read your convo. And what you say makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. I don't expect people to be greedy and mean. Just because you do, doesn't mean the rest of do or that we're lying about it. I will not reward someone behaving in a manner that I personally feel is asshole-ish. And, I believe that offering 100/0 is the mark of a complete twat. I would refuse to reward that. I have no motivation whatsoever to reward a behavior I find personally appalling. In fact, I have a lot of motivation to punish said behavior.

    Not sure why you think we'd be lying about that.
    I don't expect people to be greedy AND mean. Just greedy. I don't think greedy is mean. I think greedy is natural. I think being greedy and being immoral to satisfy that greed is mean. So the difference we seem to have is what is immoral.
    Last edited by fredmertz; 06-15-10 at 06:23 PM.

  8. #118
    Anti-Hypocrite
    molten_dragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Southeast Michigan
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    9,351

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    I'd split it 50/50, since that would be pretty much guaranteed to get me $50. I know that if I was offered less than the other guy was taking, I'd be sorely tempted to say no to the deal just out of spite. I'd have to assume he'd be the same way.
    If you build a man a fire, he'll be warm for a day.

    If you set a man on fire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  9. #119
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by fredmertz View Post
    Have you read the convo's between Mega, Tucker and myself? It's all explained there. It comes down to the fact that I think people should expect people to be greedy and that isn't immoral of those who choose to be greedy. That society is happier not sacrificing for the 'good of the pack' and instead, taking what they can, as this is natural to them IMO,under the rules that they don't cheat, lie, murder, etc. They (and I assume you) believe that as a member of society, if you see a way to distribute wealth without having to give any present value up, you should for the good of the pack and if you don't, then you should be punished. It's just a difference in what we call ideal societies.

    I beliieve that most members of society do (or should) expect person A to take as much as he can - to maximize profit. And so with that expectation, a member of society as person B should allow person A his profit since he didn't break any rules of the society (that I promote) of cheating, lying, murdering, etc. He earned it via the rules of the game and I as person B will allow it.
    Even in a perfectly rational world, with no emotional investment in the game, Player B will be completely indifferent between accepting or rejecting a $100/$0 split. Since this is the case and he has two options, in a completely rational world he would STILL reject the offer 50% of the time, making Player A's expected value only $50...or roughly the same as he'd get by offering a $50/$50 split that was accepted 100% of the time.

    Now when you factor in emotions, it's a virtual certainty that the $100/$0 split will be rejected a lot MORE than 50% of the time. With a $100/$0 split, it costs Player B absolutely nothing to take revenge on Player A for screwing him over. Since this deal will certainly be rejected more than half of the time, its expected value is much less than $50. You're better off just offering the $50/50 split.

    I'm of the opinion that the ideal offer for Player A is somewhere around $65/$35. It rewards Player A with the lion's share of the pot, but gives Player B enough money that he won't let his emotions get the best of him most of the time.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 06-15-10 at 08:56 PM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  10. #120
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:48 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Both people are out to maximize there profit

    Person A has to determine what the minimum Person B would accept without rejecting the offer, with the knowledge that should person b be offended by the offer Person A will get nothing

    $0 to Person B will be rejected a majority of the time as Person B has zero interest in seeing Person A gaining wealth.

    $1 to Person B would most likely be rejected a large percent of the time (assuming the people playing have good incomes and good wealth and that $1 or $100 does not represent alot of money to either. Should $1 represent alot of money the chances of it being accepted rises.

    The highest # of offers that would be accepted would most likely fall between a 33% to 50% split. As most Adult Americans would not particularly miss $33-50 the chances of them rejecting the money still exists. Overall in the US at this dollar value this is less an exercise in economics and more of one in sociology and what people would view as being fair to all parties.


    Change the dollar values and the likelyhood of rejecting a small % drops. For example if the dollar value that was being given was $1 million USD, and you were offered $1000 and Person A would take home $999 000 a higher number of people would take that offer, as $1000 is still a reasonable amount of money. While an equivalent % of $100 would be rejected far more often

    Overall with significant dollar values people would accept offer's that were less "fair" as the economic loss would be overcome the sense of loss of fairness in the exchange. This is a failure of this "Game theory" and the way it has generally been presented
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •