Poll
17 votes (34%) | |||
12 votes (24%) | |||
1 vote (2%) | |||
5 votes (10%) | |||
5 votes (10%) | |||
6 votes (12%) | |||
3 votes (6%) | |||
7 votes (14%) | |||
3 votes (6%) | |||
1 vote (2%) |
50 members have voted
- During a specified period of time, every player must PM to me how much money he/she wants to win. The choices are $1 or $2.
- If more than 50% of players choose $1, then everybody will win what he/she selects.
- If 50% or more players choose $2, then everybody will win $0.
- Individual submissions will be anonymous. Totals only will be announced.
- This experiment will be repeated as long as there is sufficient interest. However, I will retain the right to put a cap on the number of players. If I do, old players will have priority.
At this point I am opening the game to players. I'll accept players until noon Pacific time, August 19, or until there are 40 players, whichever happens first. After the entry period is closed, I'll ask each player to submit his play ($1 or $2) to me by Private Message. There will be a window of about two days to submit entries.
The question for the poll is what strategy will you follow?
Edit: If I were to pick $500 and everyone gets what they picked.....would I get $500? :)
Quote: RS2 & 3 are contradictory to each other, I think..
Thanks, I fixed that.
Quote:Edit: If I were to pick $500 and everyone gets what they picked.....would I get $500? :)
I'll count anything other than $1 and $2 as not picking at all.
Please announce if you're in here. Do not PM me. So far we have one confirmed player -- SOOPOO.
Question: Can we communicate with each other and make a plan?
Coincidentally, I was just thinking of "Golden Balls" the other day.
Quote:Question: Can we communicate with each other and make a plan?
Yes! It will be encouraged. I will allow for a kibitzing period before each round. In fact, the kibitzing may start now.
Players so far: SOOPOO, RS, Ayecarumba.
Quote: WizardYes! It will be encouraged. I will allow for a kibitzing period before each round. In fact, the kibitzing may start now.
Players so far: SOOPOO, RS, Ayecarumba.
Sounds like Anarchists are excluded?
BTW, anyone remember the GSN original Friend or Foe?
Quote: WizardYes! It will be encouraged. I will allow for a kibitzing period before each round. In fact, the kibitzing may start now.
Players so far: SOOPOO, RS, Ayecarumba.
Then wouldn't it be the most wise decision for all forty people to agree that 21 will vote $1 and the remaining 19 vote $2 for a total of $59 ($1.475 each)? I feel that 40 people, ESPECIALLY ON HERE, would quickly agree to do this as long as you keep it going. Although I guess that's the point of this... To see who would ruin that dollar forth-seven for that extra fifty-three cents, if they were able to finagle a $2 bet and still win.
I also will assume that it would be against the rules to, say, arrange the exact votes for all 40 players and then distribute the $59 equally.
Quote: SOOPOOI am happily participating, as I love it when Mike has to fork over a $2 bill to me. But I think the extremely insignificant amount of money any individual can win can make players not really use any strategy and be closer to random than if 'real' money was involved. I've played on line poker for fake money, and it is almost of no value as others will call anything to see your cards. I think it is analogous.
I also will assume that it would be against the rules to, say, arrange the exact votes for all 40 players and then distribute the $59 equally.
We were typing basically the same thing at the same time.
$:o)
Quote: GWAESo I think it is an interesting experiment. However I think the experiment would end with differnt results. With 1/2 the loss is not big deal. Suppose it was 20/200 with same rules. It would put more people in a tough spot on what to pick.
Good thinkin', although I still don't think that's enough for a proper experiment.
Mike should make it $500 / $2000 -- ya know, for more accurate experimental results....all in the name of science! Mhmmmm!
Quote: AyecarumbaWill the individual selections be made public after the tally? As we are sending them via PM, and PM rules are pretty strict....
No. Only the tally will be made public. Submissions will only be accepted via PM. I may do an open game (where I post who picked what) another time but this game will be closed. I do reserve the right to increase the prizes in future rounds. Somebody wrote the amounts were too small to be interesting but it may be an opportunity to prove good faith for when the money gets more serious. We'll see how it goes.
13 players so far. Some people commented without actually asking to play, which I interpreted as not being interested. If that is not correct, please clarify.
Again, please don't submit your picks yet. At this point I'm only culling players and encouraging discussion.
Players thus far:
SOOPOO
RS
Ayecarumba
Hunterhill
Paigowdan
beachbumbabs
odiousgambit
blount2000
RonC
GWAE
OnceDear
Paradigm
HeyMrDJ
2) I'm pretty certain that there was a fairly famous study about three decades ago that used a similar methodology. I can't dredge up who did the study, but I do remember that the result was skewed fairly heavily in favor of people choosing the cooperative option.
3) The real value of the study (and the concept of reciprocal altruism in general) lies in repeated iterations. Cooperation fosters more cooperation, while even a relatively small number of defections shatters the cooperative atmosphere of the group. Like Prisoner's Dilemma, a single iteration in isolated circumstances is meaningless. The Dilemma exists only if the participants don't know anything about each others' tendencies; otherwise, there are data upon which to base a decision. See: the tit-for-tat strategy in repeated iterations of Prisoner's Dilemma.
4) We're all independently minded selfish egoists here, so our results may not be generalizable to an actual human population.
5) If people choose the cooperative option, it may not be so much a sign of cooperation as a simple calculation that the utility of the first dollar is slightly greater than that of the second dollar. To illustrate, suppose that the amounts offered were actually $1 million and $2 million. Who would risk losing the first million by being greedy?
6) Though we can't do it here, I'd love to see what variations would exist by culture. You might have everyone picking $2 in Putin's Russia and everyone picking $1 in Japan, for example.
6a) In our math-challenged society, you'd have quite a few people picking amounts like $14.98.
My gut feeling is the optimum strategy is for everyone to vote $2 with P=1/3 - it's an interesting mathematical puzzle how playing "safer" brings the highest expected result. Of course if you know that's how other people will play then do you then vote $2?
Now I must watch episodes of Golden Balls on YouTube.
Quote: RSIf we all vote $1, we'll all win $1. It's really that easy, you guys. Don't **** it up!
But if you all do 1, then there is room for me to win $2 ;-)
For this thing to have any juice (or merit based on juice), the min should be $50, and the upper pay $200.
Everyone would say $1 versus $2 just to pretend to be a saint when we know otherwise.
Real money forces real honesty on what one's really about.
Especially with all those wicked AP-ers hanging around here.... ;) [wink]
Quote: RSQuestion: Can we communicate with each other and make a plan?
I'd think the optimal plan for collusion is to have 49% vote $2 and 51% vote $1, then split the prize pool (could maybe also swap votes between days to avoid needing to trust anyone with the prize pool).
But I'd also think there's a 0% chance of that happening with 40 people. I don't think that many people on a gambling forum have the willpower to not defect or form sub-committees.
Don't let being out of town prevent you from joining. It won't ruin things if you skip rounds from time to time.
Yes, I'm someone who remembers GSN Friend or Foe. They ended up being public. This is at least initially, private.
I predict that if total offered go up, we're all getting zero by round 3 at the latest. This crowd...lol
With collusion it is obvious that (N/2-1) vote $2, however suppose you are asking everyone to vote with a [independently random] 49% chance, then there is too much of a chance that more than 50% have picked $2 and everyone loses.Quote: gamerfreakI'd think the optimal plan for collusion is to have 49% vote $2 and 51% vote $1...
However suppose the first 39 people agreed a percentage and considered what happens if the 40th person then comes along. It should be indifferent whether the 40th person votes $1 or $2.
If the 39 people pick $1 too often then the 40th person can be greedy and merely picks $2, similarly if the 39 people are all greedy and pick $2 too often then the 40th person picks $1. The equilibrium position is where the 40th person has the same EV whether they pick $1 or $2. The value is about 64% to pick $2.
Any and all collusion is encouraged ? If so You have no chance with a bunch of AP's especially at such a low amount.
Can we also vote someone off the island?
Is this a contest against the other players, where the player at the end of all of the rounds who has the most winnings wins the game?
Quote: Dalex64Is this a contest against the other players, where the player at the end of all of the rounds who has the most winnings wins the game?
No. The object should be to win as much as you can. How you define "you" is up to you.
27 players so far: SOOPOO, RS, Ayecarumba, Hunterhill, Paigowdan, beachbumbabs, odiousgambit, blount2000, RonC, GWAE, OnceDear, Paradigm, HeyMrDJ, Doc, mrsuit31, Joeshlabotnik, Wizardofnothing, theoriemeister, bigfoot66, miplet, gamerfreak, jml24, rudeboyoi, doughtaker, Torghatten, AxelWolf, Dalex64.