Ranking Books - Voting VS Donating

[Xerographica]

I just donated $2 dollars...

Proof?

Yeah, it's so funny that the point of donating is to provide proof of preference strength, but now the challenge is providing proof of having made a donation. What if we routed all donations through a trusted third party?

The Wealth of Nations: $2 dollars

So you value all the other books at absolute zero, no value at all?

I value them but we can only use whole dollars.

[Galloism]

Proof?

Yeah, it's so funny that the point of donating is to provide proof of preference strength, but now the challenge is providing proof of having made a donation. What if we routed all donations through a trusted third party?

Merely holding you to your own standard:

Is there anything that stops me from just saying that I donated 500,000 dollars to The Cat in the Hat?

Nothing stops you from saying that, but in order for me to update the donating poll I'd need to see some proof.

Sorry that’s inconvenient. A screenshot of the confirmation will do. No intermediary required.

So you value all the other books at absolute zero, no value at all?

I value them but we can only use whole dollars.

So what you’re telling us is that your “donation” doesn’t reflect your true preferences? Why am I not surprised.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Xero, please, just... please. Write about something else. For God's sake, anything else.

You're pleading me to write about something else... and I'm pleading you to show me the demand for topics.

There is currently an unaddressed demand: a topic about how to shut down Xero's threads about his idiotic economic ideas.

Of course, we all know we can't do that because it is against the rules and even if it wasn't you wouldn't shut up about it anyways, but there is a demand for it.

[Xerographica]

So, I was a Moderator for four years, right?

Let's say I spent 5 hours per week on mod actions. And had 12 weeks of holidays. So 40 weeks per year. 40 times 5 times 4 years is 800 hours total.

It was volunteering work, so all time was effectively donated. Now, my professional hourly rate is not something I'd disclose, but Dutch minimal wage was €9.04 per hour in 2017.

800 times €9.04 is €7200 and a bit.

I'll donate this to a cat in a hat. You can do the conversion back to USD.

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

[Washington Resistance Army]

So, I was a Moderator for four years, right?

Let's say I spent 5 hours per week on mod actions. And had 12 weeks of holidays. So 40 weeks per year. 40 times 5 times 4 years is 800 hours total.

It was volunteering work, so all time was effectively donated. Now, my professional hourly rate is not something I'd disclose, but Dutch minimal wage was €9.04 per hour in 2017.

800 times €9.04 is €7200 and a bit.

I'll donate this to a cat in a hat. You can do the conversion back to USD.

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

No they haven't. They've been ranked by how good of pieces of literature they are.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I'm personally going to say I have donated 40 hours to dealing with this bullshit from you Xero, so from a perspective of money, and my valuation of my time, I would say I have around 1,000 dollars to spend, considering I would charge you 25 bucks an hour if I could just to put up with your shit.

Now, I will donate all of this in 50 Shades of Grey, just to spite Gallo.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

So, I was a Moderator for four years, right?

Let's say I spent 5 hours per week on mod actions. And had 12 weeks of holidays. So 40 weeks per year. 40 times 5 times 4 years is 800 hours total.

It was volunteering work, so all time was effectively donated. Now, my professional hourly rate is not something I'd disclose, but Dutch minimal wage was €9.04 per hour in 2017.

800 times €9.04 is €7200 and a bit.

I'll donate this to a cat in a hat. You can do the conversion back to USD.

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

Uh, I don't think you understand how book ranks work.

There are many categories, but more influential books are more often bought because they are influential and required reading in some way to understand something, not necessarily just because they were sold more.

Dickens was a pretty mediocre writer, that doesn't necessarily mean his books were good because they were pop writing of low quality, but because they were influential pieces of literature of that period and it shows us a facet of that period despite the crappy writer. Hell, many Victorian era books from Dickens' time were sold as chapters in periodicals. They only had a proper release years after these authors' deaths because people were interested in compiling a release from an important author like that.

[Xerographica]

Sorry that’s inconvenient. A screenshot of the confirmation will do. No intermediary required.

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.

So what you’re telling us is that your “donation” doesn’t reflect your true preferences? Why am I not surprised.

My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

Sorry that’s inconvenient. A screenshot of the confirmation will do. No intermediary required.

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.

So what you’re telling us is that your “donation” doesn’t reflect your true preferences? Why am I not surprised.

My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

You literally donated all of your money to one book.

How is that different from voting once?

[Xerographica]

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

No they haven't. They've been ranked by how good of pieces of literature they are.

Maybe you overlooked this...

I don't use donations to rank groups like GOA, I use their organizations history and their continued statements and ideological leanings to reach the conclusion that I align with them more than the NRA. I don't use donations or money to rank anything because that's just dumb.

Please, in your own words, describe exactly what you think I mean by "rank something".

[Washington Resistance Army]

No they haven't. They've been ranked by how good of pieces of literature they are.

Maybe you overlooked this...

Please, in your own words, describe exactly what you think I mean by "rank something".

I have a few ideas what you mean but they all seem equally stupid so why don't you remind me.

[Galloism]

Sorry that’s inconvenient. A screenshot of the confirmation will do. No intermediary required.

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.

Your nation page doesn’t seem to reflect you donated $2 today. Can you point out where?

So what you’re telling us is that your “donation” doesn’t reflect your true preferences? Why am I not surprised.

My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

Then you clearly don’t value wealth of nations very much. I’ve spent more on fast food that I didn’t even like when I was in a hurry.

I mean, $2. That’s like McDonalds double cheeseburger.

[Xerographica]

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.


My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

You literally donated all of your money to one book.

How is that different from voting once?

Well, it cost me two dollars. Are you going to donate any money to NationStates so that you can participate in the donating poll? If not, then it's because you more highly rank other uses of your money. But is it beneficial for you to use your money to rank things? If so, then what's the benefit?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

You literally donated all of your money to one book.

How is that different from voting once?

Well, it cost me two dollars.

So?

It's costing me a lot more money to be dealing with your shit right now than it'd ever cost me voting for it.

How is me putting up with your shit less valuable than your shitty vote of 2 dollars?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.

Your nation page doesn’t seem to reflect you donated $2 today. Can you point out where?

My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

Then you clearly don’t value wealth of nations very much. I’ve spent more on fast food that I didn’t even like when I was in a hurry.

I mean, $2. That’s like McDonalds double cheeseburger.

The fact that this is coming from you is not lost on me.

[The Blaatschapen]

So, I was a Moderator for four years, right?

Let's say I spent 5 hours per week on mod actions. And had 12 weeks of holidays. So 40 weeks per year. 40 times 5 times 4 years is 800 hours total.

It was volunteering work, so all time was effectively donated. Now, my professional hourly rate is not something I'd disclose, but Dutch minimal wage was €9.04 per hour in 2017.

800 times €9.04 is €7200 and a bit.

I'll donate this to a cat in a hat. You can do the conversion back to USD.

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

You're not teaching me economics. And I certainly don't consent to you teaching me. In no way is this a mutual agreement.

And I don't know if my time as mod was worth minimum wage, but if I were paid, it would have been at least against that, given that it is otherwise illegal.

[Xerographica]

Maybe you overlooked this...

I have a few ideas what you mean but they all seem equally stupid so why don't you remind me.

Ranking is the same thing as prioritizing. I'm guessing that you prioritize guns over knives... so you spend your money to communicate this. In other words, you use your money to inform society that you rank guns higher than knives. Why do you use your money to inform society that guns are more important/beneficial/useful to you than knives are? Because you want society's limited resources to be allocated accordingly. You want more resources to be used to produce guns and less resources to be used to produce knives. If this wasn't the case, then you'd spend the same exact amount of money on guns and knives.

What if you used voting instead of spending to rank guns and knives? This wouldn't be a good idea. My guess is that spending is much better than voting at ranking things. The trick is trying to prove this... which is the point of this thread.

[Kubra]

You literally donated all of your money to one book.

How is that different from voting once?

Well, it cost me two dollars. Are you going to donate any money to NationStates so that you can participate in the donating poll? If not, then it's because you more highly rank other uses of your money. But is it beneficial for you to use your money to rank things? If so, then what's the benefit?

I mean, between this poll and a double cheeseburger, it's clear which one is more beneficial.
Instead of ranking books, I went out and bought one, 60 bucks for a paperback. Reading a book tends to be more beneficial than paying to rank the titles.

[Xerographica]

In my case, all you have to do is check my Nations page.

Your nation page doesn’t seem to reflect you donated $2 today. Can you point out where?

Yeah, you make a good point that it should be displayed more prominently.

My donation reflects my preferences far better than my vote does.

Then you clearly don’t value wealth of nations very much. I’ve spent more on fast food that I didn’t even like when I was in a hurry.

I mean, $2. That’s like McDonalds double cheeseburger.

Ranking is a relative thing. Right now in the donating poll the Wealth of Nations is ranked higher than all the other books. Is it worth it for you to donate a few bucks to change these rankings? If not, then evidently you have more important things to use your money to help rank.

[Galloism]

Your nation page doesn’t seem to reflect you donated $2 today. Can you point out where?

Yeah, you make a good point that it should be displayed more prominently.

Bring proofs Xero. You demand proofs, you get demanded for proof. He who lives by the sword proofs shall die by the sword proofs.

Then you clearly don’t value wealth of nations very much. I’ve spent more on fast food that I didn’t even like when I was in a hurry.

I mean, $2. That’s like McDonalds double cheeseburger.

Ranking is a relative thing. Right now in the donating poll the Wealth of Nations is ranked higher than all the other books. Is it worth it for you to donate a few bucks to change these rankings? If not, then evidently you have more important things to use your money to help rank.

I honestly don’t use money to rank anything at all. Neither does almost anybody else.

[Xerographica]

Here I am spending my time to try and teach you economics. Should I assume that you derive €9.04/hour worth of benefit from my labor and charge you accordingly? If I did, then I wouldn't be a very good economics teacher.

We really shouldn't simply assume the amount of benefit that others derive from our labor. We aren't mind-readers. This is why revealing the demand for each other's labor is so important.

The authors of the 10 books used their labor to produce the books, which have been purchased by many people. The books have been ranked by buying. The thing is, buying and donating are two different ways of ranking books. They aren't going to rank the books exactly the same, and neither will voting. In this thread we have the opportunity to compare how differently the 10 books are ranked by voting and donating. Plus, we can compare these rankings to the books' sales rankings.

You're not teaching me economics. And I certainly don't consent to you teaching me. In no way is this a mutual agreement.

I'm trying to teach you economics. Evidently I'm not doing a very good job. Regarding consent... well... I think each thread is kinda like a classroom. Did somebody force you to enter my classroom? I sure didn't.

And I don't know if my time as mod was worth minimum wage, but if I were paid, it would have been at least against that, given that it is otherwise illegal.

That's such a strange concept that it's legal to pay you minimum wage, and legal to pay you nothing, but illegal to pay you anything in between.

[The Blaatschapen]

You're not teaching me economics. And I certainly don't consent to you teaching me. In no way is this a mutual agreement.

I'm trying to teach you economics. Evidently I'm not doing a very good job. Regarding consent... well... I think each thread is kinda like a classroom. Did somebody force you to enter my classroom? I sure didn't.

And I don't know if my time as mod was worth minimum wage, but if I were paid, it would have been at least against that, given that it is otherwise illegal.

That's such a strange concept that it's legal to pay you minimum wage, and legal to pay you nothing, but illegal to pay you anything in between.

Threads are not classrooms. Besides, me coming up with arguments is homework then
And homework threads are forbidden AFAIK.

[Xerographica]

Well, it cost me two dollars. Are you going to donate any money to NationStates so that you can participate in the donating poll? If not, then it's because you more highly rank other uses of your money. But is it beneficial for you to use your money to rank things? If so, then what's the benefit?

I mean, between this poll and a double cheeseburger, it's clear which one is more beneficial.
Instead of ranking books, I went out and bought one, 60 bucks for a paperback. Reading a book tends to be more beneficial than paying to rank the titles.

Donating to rank titles is the only way to maximize the chances that we buy the most beneficial books.

[Xerographica]

Yeah, you make a good point that it should be displayed more prominently.

Bring proofs Xero. You demand proofs, you get demanded for proof. He who lives by the sword proofs shall die by the sword proofs.

You could post a thread in the feedback forum suggesting that the proof of donation be more prominently displayed on Nation pages.

Ranking is a relative thing. Right now in the donating poll the Wealth of Nations is ranked higher than all the other books. Is it worth it for you to donate a few bucks to change these rankings? If not, then evidently you have more important things to use your money to help rank.

I honestly don’t use money to rank anything at all. Neither does almost anybody else.

Whenever you spend your money you help to prioritize how society's limited resources are used. Prioritizing and ranking are the same thing.

[Salandriagado]

Yeah, you make a good point that it should be displayed more prominently.

Bring proofs Xero. You demand proofs, you get demanded for proof. He who lives by the sword proofs shall die by the sword proofs.

I'm sure I can work that into a lecture at some point.