|
Posted by Warm Worm on May 25, 2007, 4:02 pm
wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >>http://www.sciam.com/print_version.cfm?articleID=7750A576-E7F2-99DF-382
> >> 4E0B1C2540D47
>
> > "the game's logic dictates that 2 is the best option"
>
> > Why? Who decides that is the "rational" choice?
>
> > FIrstly, the situation is flawed because it assumes that both people will
> > have gone to the same appraiser, and wilol have done so at a certain ebb
> > or
> > flow of the market. If the market is such that epople are paying top
> > dollar for the item, then the appriasal will be higher.
>
> > But, if Person 1 has the appraisal done during a strong market, and person
> > B has the appraisal done in the middle of an economic slump which creates
> > a
> > slow/weak market, the appraisals will differ.
>
> > Which in turn brings into play the possibility that one person might
> > actually give what s/he considers to be an honest appraisal, simply
> > because
> > there is no way of predicting with any certainty what the other person
> > would do.
>
> > IMO, (and FWLIW) the game's logic is flawed, because there is no info re:
> > the estimated proce of the item. The game asks for a choice based upon
> > nothing. IMO, that's just stupid.
>
> It also assumes that people would try and trounce the other person for 2
> measly bucks, LOL.
And then there's fuzzy logic.
| 
Yahoo! 
Google 
Windows Live 
del.icio.us 
digg 
Netscape 
XML Sitemap