The Relationship Between Cooperation And Feedback

[Xerographica]

So far only 36 people have participated in this thread's voting poll. Most forum members are ambivalent whether IM is, or isn't, more useful than I am. How many members will participate in the book voting poll? I'm guessing that a lot more members will participate. Maybe over 100 members will participate? This should increase the chances that other members will participate in the donating poll. If I'm still the only member who participates in the donating poll... then it's my donating preferences vs everybody's voting preferences. Well... out of those 100+ members who participate in the voting poll... how many will prefer my donating ranking over the voting ranking? From their perspective, a "crowd" of me is smarter than a crowd of voters.

In any case it's still an interesting statistic... for ever 100 people who donate in a voting poll, only one will care enough and/or be rich enough and/or altruistic enough to also participate in the donating poll. I doubt this is the actual ratio... but from my perspective it's still useful.

For me this experiment wouldn't be perfect, but it would still be pretty darn cool. In any case I'll learn something from it. Such as...whether members of this forum like Harry Potter more than the Bible. And how many people will vote for Jordan Peterson's book. And how many members will participate in the donating poll. If anybody else does, then I'll learn about their donating preferences.

Garbage in garbage out.

Funnily enough, I've said the same thing about voting ranking and committee ranking.

I'm not exactly sure what you want. Do you want me to not conduct the book ranking experiment? Do you want me to leave experiments to the professionals? Do you want me to conduct a better experiment? What do you want?

[Xerographica]

The main idea that is being tested is whether voting or donating is better at ranking books. And I define "better" according to my preferred rankings, which I've just shared with you and everyone else. If it turns out that my preferred rankings are actually closer to the voting rankings... then it's not like I can refute the evidence that is clear to everyone. The evidence will be clear that, according to my own definition of "better"... voting is actually better than donating at ranking books. The experiment would have falsified my belief in the superiority of spending. I'll be sad that I was proved wrong, but I'll be happy to no longer believe BS.

This is the worst criteria I've ever heard. And that's saying a lot.

You are presupposing that your ordered ranking IS the best, and that if the results of your "experiment" don't meet your preferred order, then the methodology of the experiment must be wrong or lacking. IE, if it does meet what you think is the best, it must be successful.

But there's no reason to believe your ordered ranking is the best, or, in point of fact, that there even IS a best.

If you truly don't believe that there is a best ranking of books, or anything, then why have you spent so much time arguing that voting is better than donating at ranking some things?

You really don't have to trust me. You can simply ask one of the mods to verify that I did indeed donate $2 dollars.

First, I don't think mods can see that, and second, wasn't it $3?

For this experiment it was $3 dollars. I was referring to the next experiment... book ranking. Also, I'm sure that the mods can ask Max Barry to verify donation amounts.

[Xerographica]

You wrote your reply in English, which all of us can read. Would it have mattered if you had written your reply in a language that most of us can't read? From my perspective it would have made your reply, and by extension yourself, less useful to us. Would you agree?

The usefulness of something is an assessment you can make about most anything, at any time. I agree that if you examined the usefulness of my reply, it's readability would be one factor. This builds to my argument that our idea of usefulness really comes from a mentality. People key into the usefulness of their situation for certain reasons. Not everybody would ask themselves if my reply was useful. I believe that you do because of a certain manner of thinking you have.

I'm not sure if I'm exceptional in this regard. When you're reading the replies to this thread... don't you naturally and automatically judge their usefulness to you? It can't be the case that all the posts in this thread are equally useful to you. Just like it can't be the case that all the threads in this forum are equally useful to you. I'm guessing that you don't read every thread. I'm also guessing that you don't randomly pick threads to read. Evidently there was something about this thread's title..."The Relationship Between Cooperation And Feedback"... that you found useful.

Organisms that don't automatically and naturally judge the usefulness of things aren't going to do so well. Naturally, the more correctly an organism judges the usefulness of things, the better it will do. Here's a short video clip of a coywolf judging that a goose egg is less useful than a roadkill.

Voting and donating are two very different ways that a group of people can judge the usefulness of things. Will voting or donating more correctly judge the usefulness of things? From my perspective, the correct answer is "donating". In order to discern whether my answer is truly correct... we really need to conduct more experiments. Science is incredibly useful.

[Galloism]

This is the worst criteria I've ever heard. And that's saying a lot.

You are presupposing that your ordered ranking IS the best, and that if the results of your "experiment" don't meet your preferred order, then the methodology of the experiment must be wrong or lacking. IE, if it does meet what you think is the best, it must be successful.

But there's no reason to believe your ordered ranking is the best, or, in point of fact, that there even IS a best.

If you truly don't believe that there is a best ranking of books, or anything, then why have you spent so much time arguing that voting is better than donating at ranking some things?

Because we're not talking about "ranking" things. We're talking about making policy and/or purchasing items. "Ranking" in this context is a complete made up thing by you.

You really don't have to trust me. You can simply ask one of the mods to verify that I did indeed donate $2 dollars.

First, I don't think mods can see that, and second, wasn't it $3?

For this experiment it was $3 dollars. I was referring to the next experiment... book ranking. Also, I'm sure that the mods can ask Max Barry to verify donation amounts.

Well now you've shown your hand on how much is to be spent by you.

Also, I don't think most of the mods can talk to Max Barry. Reppy probably can, but she also probably won't.

[Xerographica]

If you truly don't believe that there is a best ranking of books, or anything, then why have you spent so much time arguing that voting is better than donating at ranking some things?

Because we're not talking about "ranking" things. We're talking about making policy and/or purchasing items. "Ranking" in this context is a complete made up thing by you.

What? Here's a list of public goods...

Society security
Defense
Healthcare
Welfare and unemployment
Healthcare
Interest on debt
Education
Transportation
Veterans’ benefits
Justice

How do you think this list is sorted? Who do you think determined the order?

Here's a list of non-profits...

United Way
Salvation Army
Feeding America
Task Force for Global Health
Red Cross
Food for the Poor
Goodwill
YMCA
American Cancer Society
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

How do you think this list is sorted? Who do you think determined the order?

The idea that I made up "ranking" in any context is absurd. Congress ranks public goods, donors rank non-profits, and we will use voting and donating to rank books. And then we will see. Whether you like it or not, we will uncover the truth. We will reveal the reality of ranking systems.

[Galloism]

Because we're not talking about "ranking" things. We're talking about making policy and/or purchasing items. "Ranking" in this context is a complete made up thing by you.

What? Here's a list of public goods...

Society security
Defense
Healthcare
Welfare and unemployment
Healthcare
Interest on debt
Education
Transportation
Veterans’ benefits
Justice

How do you think this list is sorted? Who do you think determined the order?

They all operate based on need as Congress understands it. That doesn't mean "social security" is ranked higher than "justice" because it involves more money. It's that social security needs more money than justice to do its job adequately.

They aren't really "ranked" against each other in any meaningful way. You ask almost anyone, and they'd give up social security before they gave up the justice system, despite the justice system getting far less funding. But they also wouldn't take money from social security to fund the justice system. This is because "being allocated more money" doesn't mean "higher rank". That's the part you made up.

Here's a list of non-profits...

United Way
Salvation Army
Feeding America
Task Force for Global Health
Red Cross
Food for the Poor
Goodwill
YMCA
American Cancer Society
St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

How do you think this list is sorted? Who do you think determined the order?

Well, this list is sorted by people deciding who they get the best feels from donating to. That doesn't mean that they are exactly "ranked" as more important than the other. For instance, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital gets far fewer donations than YMCA, despite being a better organization all the way around.

However, St. Jude Children's Research Hospital also bills for services.

The idea that I made up "ranking" in any context is absurd. Congress ranks public goods, donors rank non-profits, and we will use voting and donating to rank books. And then we will see. Whether you like it or not, we will uncover the truth. We will reveal the reality of ranking systems.

Nah, it has nothing to do with "ranking". Just because an organization receives more money doesn't make it better than another organization that receives less. Here's a good personal example.

Would you rather have no water or no shelter? Which do you allocate more money to?

[Xerographica]

Nah, it has nothing to do with "ranking". Just because an organization receives more money doesn't make it better than another organization that receives less.

If people give a lot more money to the Red Cross than to the KKK... it has nothing to do with "ranking"... or... prioritizing... or... hierarchy... or... relative usefulness... or... relative importance... or... the social order?

Would you rather have no water or no shelter? Which do you allocate more money to?

I'd rather have no shelter. I allocate a lot more money to shelter.

If I'm stranded on a deserted island, then initially I'd prioritize water over shelter. But if I get my water supply squared away... then my priorities would change. How could they not? If I have more than enough water, but no shelter, would you expect me to continue endeavoring to acquire even more water?

You think in some cases voting is better than spending at communicating our priorities. How could this only be true in some cases? It can't be. Economics doesn't work like that. Like I said, you can kick and scream all you want, you can obfuscate all you want, but we're going to figure out the truth about voting and spending.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Nah, it has nothing to do with "ranking". Just because an organization receives more money doesn't make it better than another organization that receives less.

If people give a lot more money to the Red Cross than to the KKK... it has nothing to do with "ranking"... or... prioritizing... or... hierarchy... or... relative usefulness... or... relative importance... or... the social order?

Would you rather have no water or no shelter? Which do you allocate more money to?

I'd rather have no shelter. I allocate a lot more money to shelter.

If I'm stranded on a deserted island, then initially I'd prioritize water over shelter. But if I get my water supply squared away... then my priorities would change. How could they not? If I have more than enough water, but no shelter, would you expect me to continue endeavoring to acquire even more water?

You think in some cases voting is better than spending at communicating our priorities. How could this only be true in some cases? It can't be. Economics doesn't work like that. Like I said, you can kick and scream all you want, you can obfuscate all you want, but we're going to figure out the truth about voting and spending.

Literally everyone except you has already figured out the truth.

[Xerographica]

If people give a lot more money to the Red Cross than to the KKK... it has nothing to do with "ranking"... or... prioritizing... or... hierarchy... or... relative usefulness... or... relative importance... or... the social order?


I'd rather have no shelter. I allocate a lot more money to shelter.

If I'm stranded on a deserted island, then initially I'd prioritize water over shelter. But if I get my water supply squared away... then my priorities would change. How could they not? If I have more than enough water, but no shelter, would you expect me to continue endeavoring to acquire even more water?

You think in some cases voting is better than spending at communicating our priorities. How could this only be true in some cases? It can't be. Economics doesn't work like that. Like I said, you can kick and scream all you want, you can obfuscate all you want, but we're going to figure out the truth about voting and spending.

Literally everyone except you has already figured out the truth.

I kinda like your posts but... whenever it feels like we're about to arrive at some reasonable destination... you vanish and then reappear somewhere else. Almost like I'm Sisyphus and you're my boulder.

How could you have figured out the truth without seeing any direct comparisons of voting and donating? In this thread Galloism and I have already shared our preferred ranking of the 10 books. Now it's your turn...

12 Rules For Life
50 Shades of Grey
A Theory of Justice
Principia
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
The Cat in the Hat
War and Peace
The Wealth of Nations
The Origin Of Species
The Bible

What's your preferred ranking of these books? Do you predict that it will be closer to the voting ranking or the donating ranking?

[Neutraligon]

Why are you now ranking books instead of looking at what has happened in the real world with your poll and the donation thing. You have gotten actual results from your poll in this thread, (results that where kinda predictable, yes I thought IM would win). I also predicted that you would be the only one willing to donate to answer the poll and the reason is kinda obvious. To put it simply, we value our money far more then we value paying to vote in a useless poll. If we wanted to donate to this website or to Max Berry there are far better methods of doing so. Your results are telling you loud a clear about our preferences.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Literally everyone except you has already figured out the truth.

I kinda like your posts but... whenever it feels like we're about to arrive at some reasonable destination... you vanish and then reappear somewhere else. Almost like I'm Sisyphus and you're my boulder.

How could you have figured out the truth without seeing any direct comparisons of voting and donating? In this thread Galloism and I have already shared our preferred ranking of the 10 books. Now it's your turn...

12 Rules For Life
50 Shades of Grey
A Theory of Justice
Principia
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
The Cat in the Hat
War and Peace
The Wealth of Nations
The Origin Of Species
The Bible

What's your preferred ranking of these books? Do you predict that it will be closer to the voting ranking or the donating ranking?

Sorry for disappearing. I'm afraid one can only bang one's head against a brick wall for so long before one needs a rest.

What's the point of such a subjective measure? Especially as I'm not going to express my opinion of the books in money, so your whole donation/voting comparison won't work. You're going to gather one set of data and then be unable to compare it to the other set, because the very concept of the other set is too stupid for anyone to take part.

[Xerographica]

Why are you now ranking books instead of looking at what has happened in the real world with your poll and the donation thing. You have gotten actual results from your poll in this thread, (results that where kinda predictable, yes I thought IM would win). I also predicted that you would be the only one willing to donate to answer the poll and the reason is kinda obvious.

I have been looking at the results of this experiment. IM beat me by a mile in the voting poll. I guessed he would win, but I didn't know it would be by a mile. In the donating poll, on the other hand, I won. Then again, I was the only one to donate. I guessed that at least a few other people would donate. Clearly I overestimated the actual demand for influencing the donating rankings. Then again, maybe I overestimated the demand for this forum. Or maybe I underestimated the free-rider problem.

In the next experiment the participants will use voting and/or donating to rank 10 books. Here's your chance to make some specific predictions. You also have the chance to share your preferred ranking of these books. Will your preferred ranking be closer to the voting ranking or to the donating ranking?

If we wanted to donate to this website or to Max Berry there are far better methods of doing so.

What do you mean? As far as I know there's only one method of donating to this website. You click the "store" button on the left, select your preferred option and make a payment.

[Neutraligon]

Why are you now ranking books instead of looking at what has happened in the real world with your poll and the donation thing. You have gotten actual results from your poll in this thread, (results that where kinda predictable, yes I thought IM would win). I also predicted that you would be the only one willing to donate to answer the poll and the reason is kinda obvious.

I have been looking at the results of this experiment.

Then why do you keep mentioning rating books?

IM beat me by a mile in the voting poll. I guessed he would win, but I didn't know it would be by a mile.

Sorry to say that was also highly predictable. You are a one note pony, only showing up to repeat the same thread over and over again. IM on the other hand creates varied amusing content. Thus IM is more useful since IM provides more varied entertainment. I am pretty sure everyone here but you predicted this outcome.

In the donating poll, on the other hand, I won. Then again, I was the only one to donate. I guessed that at least a few other people would donate.

Why would you think anyone would donate using your method? You are telling them to pay for something they got for free here on a topic that to be honest is rather stupid, one they barely care about and which effects them not in the slightest. Once again everyone here but you predicted this result.

Clearly I overestimated the actual demand for influencing the donating rankings. Then again, maybe I overestimated the demand for this forum. Or maybe I underestimated the free-rider problem.

Interesting that you missed the other possibility, that people are unwilling to pay for something as stupid as a poll to rank two NSGers. Ever think that it might not be the demand for influencing donating rankings that is the problem? The problem is a mix of having far better methods of donating (like say...buying the book or actually just donating directly to the website) and the fact that the topic you are polling is useless. You would need to actually have a good topic that people want to answer (and given what NSG is this would be almost impossible to find), find something people actually want to donate to, and have your method be a better method then other methods to donate (better of course being subjective).

In the next experiment the participants will use voting and/or donating to rank 10 books. Here's your chance to make some specific predictions. You also have the chance to share your preferred ranking of these books. Will your preferred ranking be closer to the voting ranking or to the donating ranking?

As to the actual poll results for ranking the books, no idea. Given the age range on this website, I am not even sure how many people have read those books. I predict that once again you will be the only person to donate to do said rankings, and for the reasons mentioned above.

What do you mean? As far as I know there's only one method of donating to this website. You click the "store" button on the left, select your preferred option and make a payment.

And that or buy Max Barry's book. Given this website is paid for by him donating to Max is in a way donating to this website. There is also of course turning off ad-block.

[Xerographica]

I kinda like your posts but... whenever it feels like we're about to arrive at some reasonable destination... you vanish and then reappear somewhere else. Almost like I'm Sisyphus and you're my boulder.

How could you have figured out the truth without seeing any direct comparisons of voting and donating? In this thread Galloism and I have already shared our preferred ranking of the 10 books. Now it's your turn...

12 Rules For Life
50 Shades of Grey
A Theory of Justice
Principia
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
The Cat in the Hat
War and Peace
The Wealth of Nations
The Origin Of Species
The Bible

What's your preferred ranking of these books? Do you predict that it will be closer to the voting ranking or the donating ranking?

Sorry for disappearing. I'm afraid one can only bang one's head against a brick wall for so long before one needs a rest.

What's the point of such a subjective measure? Especially as I'm not going to express my opinion of the books in money, so your whole donation/voting comparison won't work. You're going to gather one set of data and then be unable to compare it to the other set, because the very concept of the other set is too stupid for anyone to take part.

What's the harm in sharing your preferred ranking? Is it difficult for you to rank the books? Is it time-consuming? It's not like it will cost you any money. Are you embarrassed of your preferred ranking? I swear I won't judge you (I'm lying) if you put 50 Shades of Grey at the top.

Regarding participation, or the lack thereof, in the donating poll... well, in this experiment the participants compared IM and myself. In the next experiment they will compare, for example, The Bible and The Origin of Species. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if ranking IM and myself didn't motivate anybody else to donate. But I will definitely be surprised if ranking The Bible and The Origin of Species doesn't motivate anybody else to donate. This is people's opportunity to offer at least some proof of how important these books are to them. Plus, it's not like the money is flushed down the toilet. It is given to the owner of this website that we all use and benefit from.

[Neutraligon]

I kinda like your posts but... whenever it feels like we're about to arrive at some reasonable destination... you vanish and then reappear somewhere else. Almost like I'm Sisyphus and you're my boulder.

How could you have figured out the truth without seeing any direct comparisons of voting and donating? In this thread Galloism and I have already shared our preferred ranking of the 10 books. Now it's your turn...

12 Rules For Life
50 Shades of Grey
A Theory of Justice
Principia
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
The Cat in the Hat
War and Peace
The Wealth of Nations
The Origin Of Species
The Bible

What's your preferred ranking of these books? Do you predict that it will be closer to the voting ranking or the donating ranking?

Sorry for disappearing. I'm afraid one can only bang one's head against a brick wall for so long before one needs a rest.

What's the point of such a subjective measure? Especially as I'm not going to express my opinion of the books in money, so your whole donation/voting comparison won't work. You're going to gather one set of data and then be unable to compare it to the other set, because the very concept of the other set is too stupid for anyone to take part.

Like I said for us to donate using Xeros method, three things need to occur.

First the poll must be interesting, and must effect us in the real world. Given this is NSG, that is already highly unlikely to occur. Why should we care about ranking books on this website, or ranking NSGers. Both polls are absolutely useless and boring.

Second the thing the donations are going to must be something we want to support. Even if we where donating to NSG that is not necessarily the case.

Third, there must not be other better ways of donating to the above cause. In the case of donating to NSG well, there is removing ad-block, going to the store and becoming a supporter, or even buying Max's book. All of these are better methods then the method Xero has proposed.

For people on NSG Xero has failed at least 2 and possibly all three of the above requirements.

[Xerographica]

In the next experiment the participants will use voting and/or donating to rank 10 books. Here's your chance to make some specific predictions. You also have the chance to share your preferred ranking of these books. Will your preferred ranking be closer to the voting ranking or to the donating ranking?

As to the actual poll results for ranking the books, no idea. Given the age range on this website, I am not even sure how many people have read those books. I predict that once again you will be the only person to donate to do said rankings, and for the reasons mentioned above.

Why didn't you share your preferred ranking of the 10 books?

[Neutraligon]

As to the actual poll results for ranking the books, no idea. Given the age range on this website, I am not even sure how many people have read those books. I predict that once again you will be the only person to donate to do said rankings, and for the reasons mentioned above.

Why didn't you share your preferred ranking of the 10 books?

Why should I? Why didn't you respond to the rest of my comment?

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Sorry for disappearing. I'm afraid one can only bang one's head against a brick wall for so long before one needs a rest.

What's the point of such a subjective measure? Especially as I'm not going to express my opinion of the books in money, so your whole donation/voting comparison won't work. You're going to gather one set of data and then be unable to compare it to the other set, because the very concept of the other set is too stupid for anyone to take part.

What's the harm in sharing your preferred ranking? Is it difficult for you to rank the books? Is it time-consuming? It's not like it will cost you any money. Are you embarrassed of your preferred ranking? I swear I won't judge you (I'm lying) if you put 50 Shades of Grey at the top.

Regarding participation, or the lack thereof, in the donating poll... well, in this experiment the participants compared IM and myself. In the next experiment they will compare, for example, The Bible and The Origin of Species. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if ranking IM and myself didn't motivate anybody else to donate. But I will definitely be surprised if ranking The Bible and The Origin of Species doesn't motivate anybody else to donate. This is people's opportunity to offer at least some proof of how important these books are to them. Plus, it's not like the money is flushed down the toilet. It is given to the owner of this website that we all use and benefit from.

It's quite difficult, given that I've only read three of them. You've set up a rather awful survey (which perhaps shouldn't be surprising). There's going to be basically no one who's read all ten of those books.

But if you want my ranking, I suppose it's this:
1. War and Peace
2. Cat in the Hat
3. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

[The Blaatschapen]

My book ranking :

The Origin Of Species
Principia
Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone
The Cat in the Hat
War and Peace
The Wealth of Nations
A Theory of Justice
The Bible
50 Shades of Grey


I did not rank 12 Rules of life. This is about books, not mindless drivel.

[Xerographica]

Sorry for disappearing. I'm afraid one can only bang one's head against a brick wall for so long before one needs a rest.

What's the point of such a subjective measure? Especially as I'm not going to express my opinion of the books in money, so your whole donation/voting comparison won't work. You're going to gather one set of data and then be unable to compare it to the other set, because the very concept of the other set is too stupid for anyone to take part.

Like I said for us to donate using Xeros method, three things need to occur.

First the poll must be interesting, and must effect us in the real world. Given this is NSG, that is already highly unlikely to occur. Why should we care about ranking books on this website, or ranking NSGers. Both polls are absolutely useless and boring.

Survey topics aren't going to be equally useless and boring to everyone. You might not be interested in how The Bible is ranked compared to The Origin of Species... but I sure am. Maybe some other members will also be interested. Maybe other members will be so interested they will be willing to donate a few bucks to help influence the donating rankings. However, if you can think of a more useful survey topic then please don't hesitate to share it. And it's not like you need my permission to conduct your own voting vs donating survey.

Second the thing the donations are going to must be something we want to support. Even if we where donating to NSG that is not necessarily the case.

What are you suggesting? That the donated money be given to the Humane Society rather than to NationStates? Even if the mods approved this, I'm not sure how we could verify that the donations were actually made.

Third, there must not be other better ways of donating to the above cause. In the case of donating to NSG well, there is removing ad-block, going to the store and becoming a supporter, or even buying Max's book. All of these are better methods then the method Xero has proposed.

I think you might be confused about my proposed donating method. My proposed method is for people to click the "Store" button to the left, select an option, and make a payment. If they do this, then they are given the opportunity to participate in the donating poll. Participating in the donating poll is a perk of donating to NS.

[Anywhere Else But Here]

Like I said for us to donate using Xeros method, three things need to occur.

First the poll must be interesting, and must effect us in the real world. Given this is NSG, that is already highly unlikely to occur. Why should we care about ranking books on this website, or ranking NSGers. Both polls are absolutely useless and boring.

Survey topics aren't going to be equally useless and boring to everyone. You might not be interested in how The Bible is ranked compared to The Origin of Species... but I sure am. Maybe some other members will also be interested. Maybe other members will be so interested they will be willing to donate a few bucks to help influence the donating rankings. However, if you can think of a more useful survey topic then please don't hesitate to share it. And it's not like you need my permission to conduct your own voting vs donating survey.

Second the thing the donations are going to must be something we want to support. Even if we where donating to NSG that is not necessarily the case.

What are you suggesting? That the donated money be given to the Humane Society rather than to NationStates? Even if the mods approved this, I'm not sure how we could verify that the donations were actually made.

Third, there must not be other better ways of donating to the above cause. In the case of donating to NSG well, there is removing ad-block, going to the store and becoming a supporter, or even buying Max's book. All of these are better methods then the method Xero has proposed.

I think you might be confused about my proposed donating method. My proposed method is for people to click the "Store" button to the left, select an option, and make a payment. If they do this, then they are given the opportunity to participate in the donating poll. Participating in the donating poll is a perk of donating to NS.

So...since no one else is going to donate, are you saying that if I go and give Max Barry a couple of quid, and then tell you that I hate the Wealth of Nations, you'll concede that everything you believe is wrong? You'll stop posting these threads?

[Xerographica]

What's the harm in sharing your preferred ranking? Is it difficult for you to rank the books? Is it time-consuming? It's not like it will cost you any money. Are you embarrassed of your preferred ranking? I swear I won't judge you (I'm lying) if you put 50 Shades of Grey at the top.

Regarding participation, or the lack thereof, in the donating poll... well, in this experiment the participants compared IM and myself. In the next experiment they will compare, for example, The Bible and The Origin of Species. I suppose I shouldn't be surprised if ranking IM and myself didn't motivate anybody else to donate. But I will definitely be surprised if ranking The Bible and The Origin of Species doesn't motivate anybody else to donate. This is people's opportunity to offer at least some proof of how important these books are to them. Plus, it's not like the money is flushed down the toilet. It is given to the owner of this website that we all use and benefit from.

It's quite difficult, given that I've only read three of them. You've set up a rather awful survey (which perhaps shouldn't be surprising). There's going to be basically no one who's read all ten of those books.

But if you want my ranking, I suppose it's this:
1. War and Peace
2. Cat in the Hat
3. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

Heh, given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow (Linus's Law). Thanks for sharing your preferred ranking. Yeah I doubt that anybody has read all 10 books. But our group as a whole has probably read all 10 books. As a group we've collectively read far more books than any individual member of the group has read. This is the point of ranking them as a group. It's the premise of the wisdom of the crowd concept. The question is whether a crowd of voters is wiser than a crowd of donors. Whose recommendations should you trust more highly?

[Neutraligon]

Like I said for us to donate using Xeros method, three things need to occur.

First the poll must be interesting, and must effect us in the real world. Given this is NSG, that is already highly unlikely to occur. Why should we care about ranking books on this website, or ranking NSGers. Both polls are absolutely useless and boring.

Survey topics aren't going to be equally useless and boring to everyone.

True, considering people where willing to answer this one for free despite it being highly predictable the outcome.

You might not be interested in how The Bible is ranked compared to The Origin of Species... but I sure am.

Why should I care how one is ranked compared to the other. If I have read the books then I can form my own ranking based on my own idea of what is useful or enjoyable to me. If I have not read the books, I do not know people well enough on the website to have any idea of if their rankings are at all useful to me. For all I know people on this website and I have very different taste's in books. Further, if I have not read the books, ranking the books tells me nothing about the books to suggest if I should read them or not. In other words, without more knowledge of book preferences and how the match up to me this ranking is entirely useless.

Maybe some other members will also be interested.

Possible, although more likely is they are willing to answer so long as it costs them nothing

Maybe other members will be so interested they will be willing to donate a few bucks to help influence the donating rankings.

Not going to happen.

However, if you can think of a more useful survey topic then please don't hesitate to share it.

Can't think of one that would get anyone to donate.

And it's not like you need my permission to conduct your own voting vs donating survey.

Why would I try to do a donation survey of the type you put forward when I already know the results? People might be willing to answer for free, they will not be willing to do so for the donation scheme you have put forward, for the reasons listed below.

Second the thing the donations are going to must be something we want to support. Even if we where donating to NSG that is not necessarily the case.

What are you suggesting? That the donated money be given to the Humane Society rather than to NationStates? Even if the mods approved this, I'm not sure how we could verify that the donations were actually made.

Correct. Since the mods are likely not going to reveal donations anyway due to privacy, your second point is moot.

Third, there must not be other better ways of donating to the above cause. In the case of donating to NSG well, there is removing ad-block, going to the store and becoming a supporter, or even buying Max's book. All of these are better methods then the method Xero has proposed.

I think you might be confused about my proposed donating method. My proposed method is for people to click the "Store" button to the left, select an option, and make a payment. If they do this, then they are given the opportunity to participate in the donating poll. Participating in the donating poll is a perk of donating to NS.

Better then what I thought your method was, but then you still have the issue of the above mentioned issues.

[Neutraligon]

It's quite difficult, given that I've only read three of them. You've set up a rather awful survey (which perhaps shouldn't be surprising). There's going to be basically no one who's read all ten of those books.

But if you want my ranking, I suppose it's this:
1. War and Peace
2. Cat in the Hat
3. Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone

Heh, given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow (Linus's Law). Thanks for sharing your preferred ranking. Yeah I doubt that anybody has read all 10 books. But our group as a whole has probably read all 10 books. As a group we've collectively read far more books than any individual member of the group has read. This is the point of ranking them as a group. It's the premise of the wisdom of the crowd concept. The question is whether a crowd of voters is wiser than a crowd of donors. Whose recommendations should you trust more highly?

Neither. and for the reasons I listed in the post above. If I have read the books, why should I care how others rank them, especially since the ranking is likely to be based on varying criteria. For instance I might rank do to usefulness to me in particular (excluding personal enjoyment), while others might rank due to personal enjoyment or to getting children to read or any other number of ways to rank usefulness. Given the various ways one can take usefulness, your ranking means nothing.

If I have not read the books, then your rankings tell me jackshit about the books and whether I should read them.

[Xerographica]

Survey topics aren't going to be equally useless and boring to everyone. You might not be interested in how The Bible is ranked compared to The Origin of Species... but I sure am. Maybe some other members will also be interested. Maybe other members will be so interested they will be willing to donate a few bucks to help influence the donating rankings. However, if you can think of a more useful survey topic then please don't hesitate to share it. And it's not like you need my permission to conduct your own voting vs donating survey.


What are you suggesting? That the donated money be given to the Humane Society rather than to NationStates? Even if the mods approved this, I'm not sure how we could verify that the donations were actually made.


I think you might be confused about my proposed donating method. My proposed method is for people to click the "Store" button to the left, select an option, and make a payment. If they do this, then they are given the opportunity to participate in the donating poll. Participating in the donating poll is a perk of donating to NS.

So...since no one else is going to donate, are you saying that if I go and give Max Barry a couple of quid, and then tell you that I hate the Wealth of Nations, you'll concede that everything you believe is wrong? You'll stop posting these threads?

To be clear, donations made before the donating poll has been created can't be applied to it. Also, the book ranking donating poll won't give you the option to use your money to convey your hatred for a book. You can only use your donation to convey your love for a book. That being said, if the donating poll ranks the Wealth of Nations lower than the voting poll does, then this will falsify my belief in the superiority of spending.

Imagine an elementary school teacher and her 30 students use voting and donating to rank the same ten books. With voting the students are going to win. But with donating, chances are good that the teacher will win.