= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Warrigal comments on Playing the Meta-game - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (44)
It took me an unduly long time (five minutes, perhaps) to figure out that there were two main participants, who were in competition, with seven accessory participants each. Is it just me? (I wonder if this has anything to do with the unusually high amount of caffeine I had today.)
It wasn't just you. I didn't understand it 'till I read further into the post.
Ditto that. It took me two readings of the explanation of the game to make any sense of it. It also did not, at first, occur to me what the relationship of the strips of paper were to the game, either.
I wonder how the addition of a middle-man would have effected the game.
The Middle-Man's job would be to negotiate the deals between the supplier and the 7 "buyers." He would get a cut of the deals made (negotiated himself from each party of the deal). Now, there would need to be some incentive for the supplier or the buyer to go through this middle-man.
I was very confused by the description of the setup as well, but I just kept reading and sense emerged as the actual game was described.
Based on previous feedback, there are a number of things in this story about which I was unclear, so it may very well have been on my end.
That said, I'm rather honored that you put in that degree of effort!
Oh dear. Being happy due to a bad thing is dangerous, you know.