Topic: What is fair? (Read 1231 times)

Saying something doesn't actually make it true. The problem is that you don't understand "fair", like so many of the entitlement generation. Fair is to be unbiased and impartial, and you cannot be either one when the verdict directly impacts you. It's why judges don't rule on things where they're involved for example. "Today's case is Old_Engineer vs. Judge Joint in the case of the missing bitcoins. How do you rule, Judge Joint? Oh, you rule in favor of yourself? Shocker!"

The "change" in rules made it clear what time zone we were voting in, for the express purpose of avoiding what ended up happening. If the $4 mark had been breached on Dec 19 UTC, you would have won and you would have been happy. In fact, if it had happened on Dec. 18 you would have likewise won. If the $4 mark had come two hours earlier, you would have also won. When the rule clarification was made (because some people would wrongly assume that the world revolves around their time zone), that's all it was: a clarification of when exactly we were expecting the $4 mark to breach. That is not unfair--statistically or otherwise. When you throw out terms like "statistically unfair", you sound like you either have no clue what you're saying, or you're just trying to use big words to improve your nonsensical argument. Statistics have nothing to do with when the $4 mark was broken, or whether it was fair to switch to UTC/GMT or not.

Again, not that you'll understand, but the only thing that happened was that what you claim was a vote for Dec. 19 CST ended up being counted as Dec. 19 UTC/GMT. You said it allowed people to vote for the same time, but it didn't--if someone else voted for Dec. 19 after you, you had the earlier post time and thus would have won. The overlap of votes only occurred in a non-UTC view of voting times, which would only create difficulties. "Hey, I live in EST and voted Dec 19, but that overlaps UTC Dec 20 for six hours, so if the $4 mark is hit during that time make sure to calculate things so it turns out in my best interest!" If OE had decided to give you the 5BTC, Goat would have a much stronger case to make as the rules were clarified to be UTC and anyone who didn't read that is SOL. All you can really say is, "I never saw the updated post where I was informed that my assumption of Dec. 19 EST was shown to be incorrect." Next time, you'll hopefully think a little bigger than EST and either ask before voting or check back on any contest where you really think you might win.

Anyway, I voted for June 27, but I actually live in an alternate realm where June 27 TST (Trogdor Standard Time) is actually Dec. 20 UTC. It's a parallel universe with a phase shift of 190 days. My vote came in before Goat, so I should have won! Damn you to hell, Old_engineer! You greedy bastard, giving 10BTC to some shmuck who likes to help orphans. What about me and my peasants, huh? We need BTC as well, and I'll donate 3BTC for them to rebuild their thatched roof cottages. Then the dragon comes in the niiiiight.....  

Nice poll.  I'm glad to have the community's input.  But seriously, I've had like a dozen people complain because I didn't "assume UTC" when UTC wasn't even part of the game.

Some people agree with me, far more don't.  Regardless, it's clear that there are at least 3 assumptions going around.  So, cut me some slack...apparently there are many different opinions here on what was a "correct assumption."

And, in all of the complaints, not one person has stood against my claim that the rule made the game statistically unfair and my reasons understating that claim.  

I am happy that Goat sent half the BTC to orphans.  That is a good cause, and the 5 BTC he received as a bonus is a kind gesture by OldEnginner.

But, that doesn't change the situation.  

I stand my ground on principle.  Feel free to continue ranting.

The U in UTC is "Universal".

I'm going to try to coin a new term here.  the_joint uncertainty principle: If no time zone is specified, the real time indicated by any given representation cannot be known with more than +/- 12 hours accuracy.

LOL I almost predicted this kind of trouble in the betting thread before the one in question, when I pointed out the OP was using non-UTC time/date.

That said, assuming non-UTC time is nonsense. The joint should be ashamed of making a mistake like this, flaming the board instead doesn't make this look any better.

The winner is obviously the one who guessed right in UTC, unless the time zone was explicitly added in the original post. This is not a matter of opinion, or who started the post, or anything else. If in doubt, UTC is to be assumed, period.

Fair is what Old Engineer says it is. He put up the coins and the contest and no one forced him to. I stated my position on this in the thread when we first passed $4. My interpretation was that Goat won since I automatically assumed GMT. When I discuss anything in BTC terms I always use GMT. Its what this forum references time to by default and its when the markets call the beginning and end of a day. Technically the bitcoin market day was the 20th and this should be enough for anyone to agree with the results.

If I were the winner and it was so close like this I might have given joint a BTC or two because it was so close. The whining from joint would just have me say fuck off though since it seems he is just a sore loser. From now on if there are any contests we should all agree on GMT unless otherwise specified as the time to reference. This would settle any dispute like this before it begins. Sadly with all this trouble if I were Old Engineer I would just stop holding contests. We didnt pay anything to join the contest and therefore should have no complaints if we do not win regardless or not if we like the rules.

Thanks for the contest Old Engineer and thank you for your generosity Goat to the orphans. I can honestly say I would probably not do the same since I am a little bit greedy.

'fair' or not, in my mind...

'the_joint' used to be the guy who had some rather interesting comments on some DEA guy in some classroom.

'the_joint' is now the guy who got all whiny, in public no less, about something trivial and silly and which he was mainly wrong about in part because he has an East Coast centric view of planet Earth (or simply neglects to visualize such a construct as a planet Earth.)

I've spent a fair amount of time as a broke-ass student and I an quite confident that it would never have occurred to me to do anything but chuckle about a loss such as this one were I in the_joint's situation so I have very little sympathy.  Sorry.

If you paid to enter the contest, you would have some say in how fair it is. Since you have nothing invested, you have no say in how it is carried out. If Old Engineer said haha, it was a joke, nobody wins anything, he has not caused you any harm and you have no cause for anger.

The nature of the particular contest is important.  This was not some simple lottery or raffle, where the outcome is based completely on luck.  There was (even if small enough to be considered negligible by some) some amount of skill involved in this contest.  Anyone that makes a skillful entry into such a contest will understandably defend the accuracy of his entry.

If I was running the contest I would have split the prize. After all, it's all in good fun. But in the end it doesn't matter what we think is fair. The guy who decided to be nice enough to donate his money for a contest is the only one whose opinion matters.

I will say, in my hypothetical situation, I would have refused to pay anyone who "demanded" anything from me. Spoiled brats don't deserve any sympathy.

Rather than throwing out terms like "fair" without trying to be fair, let's turn to what is hopefully the most unbiased arbitrator: the BTC community! Old_engineer already paid out the prize, but in the hope of ending this debate, sound off with your vote. If the outcome is different than what has already happened, we'll leave it up to goat whether he wants to give up/share his winnings.

Edit: In case you need it, here's a definition of fair: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/fair

Synonyms: Fair, impartial, disinterested, unprejudiced refer to lack of bias in opinions, judgments, etc. Fair implies the treating of all sides alike, justly and equitably: a fair compromise. Impartial, like fair, implies showing no more favor to one side than another, but suggests particularly a judicial consideration of a case: an impartial judge. Disinterested implies a fairness arising particularly from lack of desire to obtain a selfish advantage: The motives of her guardian were entirely disinterested. Unprejudiced means not influenced or swayed by bias, or by prejudice caused by irrelevant considerations: an unprejudiced decision.