I just made this experimental tool for streamlining two-party negotiations, which I'm hoping people will find useful.
If I hear of anyone striking a deal for at least $100 with it, this market resolves to YES. Otherwise it resolves to NO at the end of the year. I'll ignore any deal that seems to have been primarily for the purpose of manipulating this market.
1,000
3.00🏅 Top traders
| # | Name | Total profit |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ṁ98 | |
| 2 | Ṁ39 | |
| 3 | Ṁ4 | |
| 4 | Ṁ4 |
@bohaska Mana is worth less than money; I'd count M$15,000 or more. And it has to not be a "fake" transaction to manipulate this market.
I just used it for a ~$600 deal with an acquaintance, but that doesn't count for this market unfortunately.
This seems cool, but why wouldn't the seller put the fair price at maximum and the buyer put their fair price at minimum, resulting in an approximately uniformly random probability of a price between the buyer and seller.
@IsaacKing Yeah. I didn't really understand it, playing with the sliders it just looked like as the seller increased his fair price the expectation of his surplus increased slightly and same with the buyer (as they decreased their fair price the expectation of surplus increased for them).
@moyamo Oh hmm, you're right, the current function isn't behaving quite right. I need to fix that.
I sent you M$257.
@IsaacKing Thanks for the Mana! Is it just the example slider that is not showing the right function or is it the actual probability distribution you are using that isn't quite right? I'd be pretty impressed if you actually solved the Bargaining Problem.