A more interesting way to operationalize this I think would be to roll a die and then accept the results.
e.g. 85% resignation—we roll, if number is 1-5 you win, if number is 6 I win
So there is still a winner / loser it is just massively accelerated
C L
Karma: 4
I’ve thought about this problem a lot.
I think the reason behind it is fundamentally open-ended problems without clear end points. Where it’s possible (due to non-transitive preferences / opinions on when something is done / what to focus on) to infinitely loop over the same parts without making a lot of headway.
The way that I approached solving this meta problem is by trying to come up with a consistent way to tackle anything that can be executed with maximum speed. (i.e. where I don’t have to kind of passively “feel” that I am done and have clear completion criteria).
Reminds me a lot of Cynefin but a more explicit/structured approach to solving the Complex quadrant.
What I do when I have an open-ended problem is this:
- Put it into an outlining tool like Workflowy
- Decide what outcome I want (e.g. this plan is done, this task is done, I have decided between N things, I have identified the things to decide between)
- Brain dump various thoughts and just kind of go where the gut pushes me
- Then stop and inductively organize / structure the outline
From there I continue iterating on it and investigating things (this often include carrying out & completing specific tasks in the outline), and I specifically check in on these 3 rules to determine when to stop:
- The outcome is hit, and I can clearly summarize in 1-2 sentences
- I am looping over the same things repeatedly (reminds me of a cycle detection algo of a recursive fn)
- The next thing I would look at will not change the outcome
Many games already implement some type of “long tail cutoff”
e.g. the aforementioned Risk starts to exponentially (ish) jack up the card values to force people to kill for cards and to tip the scales faster and faster as the game goes on
However often friends and I would intentionally not do that because it’s more like approach a 50-50 chance with more randomness
So we would cap it at some point or apply some other control to allow the game to remain “fair”, but then it takes an eternity
This feels like an interesting alternative