Random Thoughts

[JayhawkCO]

I had no clue that every property not immediately bought was supposed to go up for auction—until we got a video game version that does just that.

Because it's also -EV to not buy a property if you have the money to do so. It doesn't happen all that often.

What does the boldfaced mean?

It's a term normally used in gambling/poker, but negative expected value. So if you flip a coin and I win $1 if you get heads and lose $1 if you get tails, it's 0 EV. But if I win $2 if it's heads and lose $1 if it's tails, then the EV is +$0.50, since, if we did it an infinite amount of times, I win fifty cents per flip.

In Monopoly, if you run stats on it, it's always the case that you should buy a property if you have the cash to do so.

[Max Rockatansky]

I had no clue that every property not immediately bought was supposed to go up for auction—until we got a video game version that does just that.

Because it's also -EV to not buy a property if you have the money to do so. It doesn't happen all that often.

What does the boldfaced mean?

It's a term normally used in gambling/poker, but negative expected value. So if you flip a coin and I win $1 if you get heads and lose $1 if you get tails, it's 0 EV. But if I win $2 if it's heads and lose $1 if it's tails, then the EV is +$0.50, since, if we did it an infinite amount of times, I win fifty cents per flip.

In Monopoly, if you run stats on it, it's always the case that you should buy a property if you have the cash to do so.

Hence my point about playing with regular people.  Normal casual players don't run a statistical analysis on board games. 

[kphoger]

Normal casual players don't run a statistical analysis on board games. 

And, like, of course they don't.  Because most normal people play games to just have fun.

[JayhawkCO]

Normal casual players don't run a statistical analysis on board games. 

And, like, of course they don't.  Because most normal people play games to just have fun.

I always bought every property before I ever nerded out on it though. I mean, the way you make more money is by buying properties. And buying more properties is fun. Who doesn't want to have more colors in front of them? And you already have two oranges and I get the third? I get to hold you over a barrel for trades.

[kphoger]

I always bought every property before I ever nerded out on it though. I mean, the way you make more money is by buying properties. And buying more properties is fun. Who doesn't want to have more colors in front of them? And you already have two oranges and I get the third? I get to hold you over a barrel for trades.

I'd argue, though, that it's fun to decide which properties you want to buy and then decide whether or not to spend your money on a different property instead.  That is, if I'm going for oranges, and I land on yellow, part of the fun is deciding if buying that yellow is a waste of money or not.  Simply buying everything you land on involves less decision-making and therefore less engagement in the process—even if it's statistically advantageous and objectively more colorful.


For what it's worth...

It seems appropriate, in a game designed to criticise the wealth of landlords, that luck (via dice roll) is the central driving force in this game.  While skill plays some part, it is practically superficial when you consider that a poor roll of the dice can unravel any fine negotiating or trading on the player's part.  By deploying chance as the key arbiter, the game's final vision of wealthy landlords gorging on huge profits to the detriment of others cannot be compromised.  The victor might change from game to game, but the overarching outcome will not.  It is, for all intents and purposes, an economic model in board game form.

However, this is only half of the full argument the Landlord's Game wishes to make.  Magie produced two sets of rules:  the 'monopoly' rules are the ones which went on to inspire today's Monopoly while the 'anti-monopoly' variant allows players to introduce Georgist wealth redistribution as a means of saving themselves from bankruptcy.  If 'anti-monopoly' rules were added mid-game via vote, rent (excluding rent from houses or 'improvements') would instead go towards a central government fund which would then purchase property at a reduced rate and charge lower, more equitable rents.  The win condition then becomes joint 'prosperity' (where the player with lowest wealth is required to double their initial starting stake), a U-turn from the original's anarchic 'last player standing' ruling.

This sudden switch is very deliberate.  The game is veritably a work of political economy, but instead of being a stuffy academic book or journal article, it is an interactive simulation which aims to describe a particular type of society (capitalist) and then presentation of a solution (Georgism).  The game is designed to be a sobering and educational experience for its players.  In this context, it is no surprise that Monopoly feels so horribly broken — it is missing half of the rules!  The game's central thesis, that land should not be turned into a commodity, is only half told in the millions of Monopoly sets around the world.  We are all, quite literally, playing Monopoly wrong.

[JayhawkCO]

I'd argue, though, that it's fun to decide which properties you want to buy and then decide whether or not to spend your money on a different property instead.  That is, if I'm going for oranges, and I land on yellow, part of the fun is deciding if buying that yellow is a waste of money or not.  Simply buying everything you land on involves less decision-making and therefore less engagement in the process—even if it's statistically advantageous and objectively more colorful.

I guess I just always assumed that my likelihood of rolling exactly what I needed to get the property I needed to complete a full set before someone else landed there was low. So, I always took the opportunity to get whatever I could. It's also fun to just collect rent every time, even if it's a whopping $6 for an unimproved light blue.

I don't think I was really doing statistical analysis when I was six years old playing this way. Just seemed intuitive I suppose.

[vdeane]

I'm more confused on why PG stands for "Parental Guidance" but PG-13 means "Parents Strongly Cautioned".

Originally it was supposed to be a separation of what was generally ok for kids but should probably have a parent in the room and what definitely needs a parent in the room unless the children are in their late teens. Now PG is the go-to if it's completely safe for kids, and PG-13 is for the level of action that was deemed appropriate for PG or even G (ie The Hunchback of Notre Dame) 30 years ago.

I wonder if it's a "cover your ass" sort of thing, since these days it seems like just about everything is going to have someone object to something.  Not to mention that the rating given shapes how people perceive movies - often people think "G" means "for kids" and won't see something unless it's PG or PG-13, and movies will sometimes include a swear or something just to get a higher rating.

[kphoger]

I don't think I was really doing statistical analysis when I was six years old playing this way. Just seemed intuitive I suppose.

See, when I was a kid learning Monopoly, I knew that I couldn't build on a property unless I owned all of that color, so buying a bunch of random non-matching colors was counter-intuitive.  It seemed to me that building on properties was kind of the point of the game, and everyone having a bunch of mismatched properties seemed to work against that.

[JayhawkCO]

I don't think I was really doing statistical analysis when I was six years old playing this way. Just seemed intuitive I suppose.

See, when I was a kid learning Monopoly, I knew that I couldn't build on a property unless I owned all of that color, so buying a bunch of random non-matching colors was counter-intuitive.  It seemed to me that building on properties was kind of the point of the game, and everyone having a bunch of mismatched properties seemed to work against that.

Maybe I just had more of a capitalistic instinct knowing that I could buy something that I could then sell to someone else later for more.

[Molandfreak]

I'm more confused on why PG stands for "Parental Guidance" but PG-13 means "Parents Strongly Cautioned".

Originally it was supposed to be a separation of what was generally ok for kids but should probably have a parent in the room and what definitely needs a parent in the room unless the children are in their late teens. Now PG is the go-to if it's completely safe for kids, and PG-13 is for the level of action that was deemed appropriate for PG or even G (ie The Hunchback of Notre Dame) 30 years ago.

I wonder if it's a "cover your ass" sort of thing, since these days it seems like just about everything is going to have someone object to something.  Not to mention that the rating given shapes how people perceive movies - often people think "G" means "for kids" and won't see something unless it's PG or PG-13, and movies will sometimes include a swear or something just to get a higher rating.

Maybe they should start separating ratings for children's content like TV ratings already do. TV-G is for general audiences, which is supposed to be the purpose of the G rating, while TV-Y is for young children.

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm more confused on why PG stands for "Parental Guidance" but PG-13 means "Parents Strongly Cautioned".

Originally it was supposed to be a separation of what was generally ok for kids but should probably have a parent in the room and what definitely needs a parent in the room unless the children are in their late teens. Now PG is the go-to if it's completely safe for kids, and PG-13 is for the level of action that was deemed appropriate for PG or even G (ie The Hunchback of Notre Dame) 30 years ago.

I wonder if it's a "cover your ass" sort of thing, since these days it seems like just about everything is going to have someone object to something.  Not to mention that the rating given shapes how people perceive movies - often people think "G" means "for kids" and won't see something unless it's PG or PG-13, and movies will sometimes include a swear or something just to get a higher rating.

Maybe they should start separating ratings for children's content like TV ratings already do. TV-G is for general audiences, which is supposed to be the purpose of the G rating, while TV-Y is for young children.

Or just get rid of the rating systems all together.  There are plenty of ways to find out if the content of a movie or show is appropriate for kids in modern times.  The MPAA in particular has ruined a lot of really good movies by way of holding certain ratings hostage via cut requests. 

[Scott5114]

Is it dictated that houses and hotels need to go in a specific spot on the space?  Never had a problen fitting four houses in the color strip.

Maybe you have a different Monopoly set than me, but I could never get four houses to fit in the color strip without one of them overhanging onto the adjoining property.

This is a photo of a British set, but it looks like the houses are the same size as what I'm used to.

Normal casual players don't run a statistical analysis on board games. 

And, like, of course they don't.  Because most normal people play games to just have fun.

To me figuring out the optimal strategy is fun...

[kphoger]

To me figuring out the optimal strategy is fun...

But you've probably never claimed to be normal. 

[Scott5114]

To me figuring out the optimal strategy is fun...

But you've probably never claimed to be normal. 

Who would believe me if I did?

[vdeane]

Maybe they should start separating ratings for children's content like TV ratings already do. TV-G is for general audiences, which is supposed to be the purpose of the G rating, while TV-Y is for young children.

I don't believe the MPAA even has an equivalent of Y and Y7 (and I guess Y7-FV is technically separate?)

https://www.cox.com/residential/support/tv-parental-guidelines-and-mpaa-ratings.html

[Molandfreak]

Maybe they should start separating ratings for children's content like TV ratings already do. TV-G is for general audiences, which is supposed to be the purpose of the G rating, while TV-Y is for young children.

I don't believe the MPAA even has an equivalent of Y and Y7 (and I guess Y7-FV is technically separate?)

https://www.cox.com/residential/support/tv-parental-guidelines-and-mpaa-ratings.html

Which is why I said maybe they should start. I understand that the rating system will never be perfect, but G was never meant to signify "specifically for young children."

[interstatefan990]

I'm more confused on why PG stands for "Parental Guidance" but PG-13 means "Parents Strongly Cautioned".

PG-13 originally meant...

Parents Are Strongly Cautioned to Give Special Guidance for Attendance of Children Under 13 – Some Material May Be Inappropriate for Young Children

...and then...

Parents Strongly Cautioned – Some Material May Be Inappropriate for Children Under 13

Why the change, did they need to fit that text into an on-screen rating box or something?

[Molandfreak]

I'm more confused on why PG stands for "Parental Guidance" but PG-13 means "Parents Strongly Cautioned".

PG-13 originally meant...

Parents Are Strongly Cautioned to Give Special Guidance for Attendance of Children Under 13 – Some Material May Be Inappropriate for Young Children

...and then...

Parents Strongly Cautioned – Some Material May Be Inappropriate for Children Under 13

Why the change, did they need to fit that text into an on-screen rating box or something?

More than likely, the wordier box was designed to fit in the theatrical format, but the MPAA realized that it was illegible on potato quality VHS tapes playing on a 13 inch screen.

[1995hoo]

My wife was referring to last night's game when she said "US won!"

My mind heard "US-1."

She told me I'm weird.

[Scott5114]

My wife was referring to last night's game when she said "US won!"

My mind heard "US-1."

She told me I'm weird.

I mean, you should have known she was talking about something else from tone of voice: it has been decades since anyone has been that excited about US-1.

[Max Rockatansky]

My wife was referring to last night's game when she said "US won!"

My mind heard "US-1."

She told me I'm weird.

I mean, you should have known she was talking about something else from tone of voice: it has been decades since anyone has been that excited about US-1.

Apparently the Overseas Highway is all the rage this week for some off forum road folks.  Some of them even had videos from their own pages.  It feels weird sometimes being so familiar with that part of US 1 as a commuter and not being super excited about the prospect of driving it again.

[Scott5114]

My wife was referring to last night's game when she said "US won!"

My mind heard "US-1."

She told me I'm weird.

I mean, you should have known she was talking about something else from tone of voice: it has been decades since anyone has been that excited about US-1.

Apparently the Overseas Highway is all the rage this week for some off forum road folks.  Some of them even had videos from their own pages.  It feels weird sometimes being so familiar with that part of US 1 as a commuter and not being super excited about the prospect of driving it again.

From what I've heard on here (not just from you but from others) it sounds miserable.

[Beltway]

Apparently the Overseas Highway is all the rage this week for some off forum road folks.  Some of them even had videos from their own pages.  It feels weird sometimes being so familiar with that part of US 1 as a commuter and not being super excited about the prospect of driving it again.

Like living in metro Washington. You get to take it for granted and not being excited about going into the federal district. Too much traffic above ground and below ground.

[Max Rockatansky]

^^^

I don't recall ever being excited to drive around D.C.  Usually I'm looking to get my car parked as soon as I can and finding another way to get around.  The electric scooters around the National Mall were an incredibly helpful addition the last time I was there.

My wife was referring to last night's game when she said "US won!"

My mind heard "US-1."

She told me I'm weird.

I mean, you should have known she was talking about something else from tone of voice: it has been decades since anyone has been that excited about US-1.

Apparently the Overseas Highway is all the rage this week for some off forum road folks.  Some of them even had videos from their own pages.  It feels weird sometimes being so familiar with that part of US 1 as a commuter and not being super excited about the prospect of driving it again.

From what I've heard on here (not just from you but from others) it sounds miserable.

I absolutely hated driving off the Keys during weekdays.  There are some horrific choke points in the Upper Keys that usually involve slow drivers and school zones.  One slow driver anywhere on a two lane segment can get you stuck behind a chain of thirty cars chugging at 30 MPH. 

The Overseas Highway is one of the few road segments I prefer in the middle of the night.  A full moon pops over that shallow clear water quite like no other highway I've been on.  The snowbirds don't come out at night so it tends to make traffic unusually sparse.

[Max Rockatansky]

I can't decide which modern hat phenomenon I find the strangest.  About a decade ago there was something of a hipster craze amongst people my age which had chimney sweeper hats becoming fashionable.  A similar trend seems to be happening now with Millennials and the Gilligan's Island bucket hat.