You’re assuming that straw drawing is viable. I’m trying to show why it wasn’t.
You seem to have a theory, based on that invalid assumption, about what will and will not work to motivate people to take risks. Does that theory make any useful predictions in this case?
You’re assuming that straw drawing is viable. I’m trying to show why it wasn’t.
Then you are wasting everyones time, we already know that it wasn’t viable. It was suggested and rejected. The whole discussion was about a) what would be needed to make viable (e. g. sufficiently high rationality level and sufficiently strong precommitment) and b) whether it would be the rational thing to do given the requirements.
You seem to have a theory, based on that invalid assumption, about what will and will not work to motivate people to take risks. Does that theory make any useful predictions in this case?
No. I was taking your model of what will and will not work to motivate people to take risks and demonstrating that your conclusion did not follow from it.
You’re assuming that straw drawing is viable. I’m trying to show why it wasn’t.
You seem to have a theory, based on that invalid assumption, about what will and will not work to motivate people to take risks. Does that theory make any useful predictions in this case?
Then you are wasting everyones time, we already know that it wasn’t viable. It was suggested and rejected. The whole discussion was about a) what would be needed to make viable (e. g. sufficiently high rationality level and sufficiently strong precommitment) and b) whether it would be the rational thing to do given the requirements.
No. I was taking your model of what will and will not work to motivate people to take risks and demonstrating that your conclusion did not follow from it.