God I hate that Americans have decided that you vote for the person you like rather than vote to stop the worst person.
Turns out game theory [as described in this election] doesn’t describe how people (on aggregate) actually behave. It does describe how some people think people should behave (I may sometimes agree), but not how they actually do.
If I know you rationally follow game theory [as described], I’m going to offer you far less than anyone else because I know game theorists [as…] take any win, no matter how small. Ultimatum game? I offer everyone a 50-50 split, except game theorists, to whom I offer a penny. They’ll take it too.
Dems didn’t appeal to how people actually act, and so you all lost. Their supporters refused to acknowledge the reality of how groups behave, and so you all lost.
I don’t know what to tell you, I’m not Burt Reynolds. You just accuse people of things whether they’re true or not. I’m not sure why you think it’s okay to lie.
I didn’t accuse you of being a democrat, you just inferred that I did and started calling me a liar. Would you like to get back on topic?
Dems didn’t appeal to how people actually act, and so you all lost. Their supporters refused to acknowledge the reality of how groups behave, and so you all lost.
Your words. And no, I do not usually accuse people of things for which I do not have evidence. You do not speak for me on that any more than you speak for me on what political party I I’m a member of. You do not get to dictate these things.
Can we calm down a little, you don’t need to be so combative.
Those are my words, and that was your inference. “you” was referring to citizens of the United states. I could have made that more clear.
You can apologise for calling me a liar now. With that little distraction dealt with we can discuss the topic civilly? Maybe, we can assume each other a rational human beings that want similar things and aren’t out to accuse each other of random shit? Please?
Turns out game theory [as described in this election] doesn’t describe how people (on aggregate) actually behave. It does describe how some people think people should behave (I may sometimes agree), but not how they actually do.
If I know you rationally follow game theory [as described], I’m going to offer you far less than anyone else because I know game theorists [as…] take any win, no matter how small. Ultimatum game? I offer everyone a 50-50 split, except game theorists, to whom I offer a penny. They’ll take it too.
Dems didn’t appeal to how people actually act, and so you all lost. Their supporters refused to acknowledge the reality of how groups behave, and so you all lost.
Are you claiming I am a Democrat? Can you present some evidence to that effect?
Are you claiming I am a millionaire? Can you present some evidence to that effect? If you’re gonna tilt at windmills this conversation is pointless.
So no, you can’t. You just accuse people of things whether they’re true or not. I’m not sure why you think it’s okay to lie.
I don’t know what to tell you, I’m not Burt Reynolds. You just accuse people of things whether they’re true or not. I’m not sure why you think it’s okay to lie.
I didn’t accuse you of being a democrat, you just inferred that I did and started calling me a liar. Would you like to get back on topic?
Your words. And no, I do not usually accuse people of things for which I do not have evidence. You do not speak for me on that any more than you speak for me on what political party I I’m a member of. You do not get to dictate these things.
Can we calm down a little, you don’t need to be so combative.
Those are my words, and that was your inference. “you” was referring to citizens of the United states. I could have made that more clear.
You can apologise for calling me a liar now. With that little distraction dealt with we can discuss the topic civilly? Maybe, we can assume each other a rational human beings that want similar things and aren’t out to accuse each other of random shit? Please?