It was two years ago today...

[slingshot]

Let me just say this. If people don't come to the proper conclusion from an equation, the assumption is that the people "reading" the equation are wrong. If these same people come to a wrong conclusion from a verbal summary, the fault does not necessarily or even most likely lie with the readers, but with the writer. The writer has a responsibility to be clear, just as the "writer" of an equation has a responsibility to use a left-to-right format and not something right to left (that's a salute to Alan in case he reads Hebrew).

The responsibility to guide lies with the writer. If the readers are of average or above intelligence, and their conclusions are generally wrong vis-a-vis the material, the writer has failed.

In this case I don't think the writer was at fault. I think the writer intentionally wrote a question to confuse and to draw out incorrect answers. I said this both on this forum and the WOV forum because of how the original poster of the question had a "spoiler" that revealed nonsense. Also the question was set up to throw off the way responders might answer the question.

The original poster of the question never returned to the WOV forum again which means he was there for one purpose and one purpose only: to create chaos and to throw off the mathematicians. He did that.

So if someone came along with a VP strategy and no one was willing to try it, but instead used spurious theories based on "superior" math ability and probability- would that be nothing more than an attempt to create chaos? Nah. I guess that's too far fetched.