Well, again, there isn't much actual party staff in NY. I don't know if they are required to be members of the party. I do know that it is illegal to require political staff to be members of the politician's party or to do campaign work, although some such jobs do have wink, wink requirements that you do so.

This is what I was asking*. I always though political parties had the same exemption as churches. Thanks.

^{*standard unintended 'strawmanning' boilerplate.}
Wage theft is something that makes Sabo real mad.

Boooo.

What happened here? Post were deleted, including one of mine. Why?

Idk I don't think anyone who pays attention would accuse you of a derail or trolling but then words don't mean anything.

In this context, there aren't equivalent words for 0 EV or - EV, because all of the investments should be +EV. The riskier investments should be more +EV than the less risky investments.

By "this context", I mean the context of investments in assets.

This.

Wow, did whosnext really just delete post and threaten to punish it's author because he disagreed with it? That sums to zero on the integrity scale. At least notify one of the other mods to do your dirty work and at least keep up the appearance of professionalism.

lolSMP, as always.

Can someone who saw the deleted posts give an overview of their content? Did they command deletion for any reason?

I can't see content only that the message was deleted and the reason.

IDK if anyone else's posts have been deleted. I can only speak for myself.

This is false. Nobody has got back to me yet. I'd like to remind everybody that it's 10:45 am PDT on a work day. Some people have jobs... even mods have jobs. So I think cooler heads should prevail and...

OK. I snipped the rest for a particular reason. I didn't ask you why. And I already explained to you that the why wasn't relevant to the point I'm trying to make. Which makes me feel you are fighting me here.

But, luckily for me, you brought up the next thingee I wanted to get to. Our magical analogy pointers have another dimension of scope. They are scoped by person, but as you just pointed out, they are also scoped by context. So we got so far...

TD::default::minus_EV = "-EV";
TD::default::zero_EV = "0 EV";
TD::yapping_about_capitalism::reward =
TD::default:: plus_EV = "+EV";

====> are we on the same page here ?


Yes of course. We all agree with that. You, me, whosnext, the Wikipedia authors, stanford.udu, and everyone else who actually uses this term. That's not the question at hand. That has never been the question at hand.

The question was about the FoldnDark Game. Is the FoldnDark Game what we all agree is called a ZSG -or- not.

Is the line "TD::yapping_about_capitalism::reward =" meant to be "TD::yapping_about_capitalism::reward = "+EV"".

If yes, we are on the same page.


The "FoldnDark Game" is the one where A and B decide whether to call each other racist or not?

If yes, then I do not agree that it is necessarily a zero sum game.

.

Yes.

You missed that there wasn't a ";" at the end of that line. I shouldn't have been a smart-ass. My bad.

Yes. We should be able to work up a payoff matrix for the FoldnDark Game. I'd like to do this. The problem is that this involves taking FoldnDark prose, and then making reasonable assumptions, to fill in the values.

I'm going to ask you a favor here. Could you take a first pass at this? The reason being is that I gotta figure if I tried to, my posts might start getting deleted again.

Ha. Fair enough.

I think I took a shot at this already in the other thread, but sure. Since the payoffs here are utility, we have to first make an assumption about where zero is. The most logical place to define (0, 0) seems to me to be the current status quo. I would say that the current status quo is "A sez it, B sez it".

I think a possible payoff matrix looks like:

The R-word game	B sez it	B don't
A sez it	(0,0)	(0.5,-0.5)
A don't	(-0.5,0.5)	(1,1)

[QUOTE=TiltedDonkey;52558383]... I think a possible payoff matrix looks like:

The R-word game	B sez it	B don't
A sez it	(0,0)	(0.5,-0.5)
A don't	(-0.5,0.5)	(1,1)

OK VG.

I'm also pretty sure where I went off the rails and made that mistake regarding ZSG. Which was, I now realize, completely my mistake.

The above game, is indeed what FoldnDark is saying. It is indeed NZSG. But, sadly for FoldnDark, reality doesn't work that way. So /QED he's FOS.

Where I was wandering off in the weeds, was here: Reality requires a ZSG in this situation. So... instead of just saying that. I kept bleating out "It is a ZSG" instead. The reason I just pwned myself so hard is this... Dogmatic Word Association. My pointers were crossed.

My bad.

Okay, fair enough. Why do you say that reality requires a ZSG in this situation?