From: "Jon Leonard" <jleonard@divcom.umop-ap.com>
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 1996 10:34:14 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Betting and reputations  Was: Re: Jim Bell, Apology to list.  Was: [Yadda Yadda Yadda]
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960421192206.9131E-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
Message-ID: <9604232037.AA21133@divcom.umop-ap.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text


It's an interesting vindication of the nym reputation model that no one
has questioned the meaning of Black Unicorn offering to bet $50,000, even
though (to the best of my knowlege) this is only backed by his writings,
not any sort of ecash account or reference to a True Name.

I noticed this in my reaction to seeing the $50,000 figure, and wondering
first about financial resources, and only then about the fact that there
really isn't any way to force payment by a nym.  Black Unicorn's writings
are convincing evidence that he'd pay a gambling debt.  (Not that I think
he'd lose this bet, but that's a separate issue.)

The other thing I noticed is that reputation capital isn't a simple economic
quantity:

Black Unicorn wrote: 
[snip]
> All this said, I find Mr. May's and Mr. Sandfort's criticism stinging.  Mr. 
> Bell, and my response to him, manages to sap a great deal of time and effort 
> from myself and others for no gain aside draining his (and to some extent my) reputation 
> capital.  These disputes serve little purpose otherwise.  It's clear to 
> me, if not everyone else, that Mr. Bell simply fabricates his positions, 
> evidence, and persuasion out of the mist.

I have to disagree about the effect on Black Unicorn's reputation capital.
My opinion of his legal skills and probable economic behavior are not
diminished by his argument with Jim Bell.  I have decided that he is more
likely to rant than I had previously thought, though.

The underlying model for reputation capital seems to be economics, but some
amount of psychology or economic anthropology is probably more appropriate.
We develop mental models of the behavior of others based on their actions.
Often more detail is required than the monetary amount required to make
someone untrustworthy.

The relevant question seems to be "Is this worth reading", judged on the
basis of prior writing.  My answer of "Yes, but if it's about Jim Bell,
then only maybe" can't be modeled as a single number.

Jon Leonard