Posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2013, at 18:29:37
In reply to Re: the commons, posted by alexandra_k on September 20, 2013, at 5:10:22
typically in the human behaviour case people consider:
- collection of resources
- distribution of resources
- mate selection / care of offspring (guys need to trust the offspring is theirs, girls need to trust they will receive appropriate assistance with bearing the metabolic costs of pregnancy / lactation - at the very least -)with respect to co-operation. there are opportunities to defect (or to be incapacitated in some way) with respect to these...
(i'd be interested to know whether people with mental illness have problems assessing their contribution in public goods games / whether their future discounting is more extreme. difficulties with 'mental time travel'? or perhaps math? lolz.)
message board analogy?
in order for evolution to occur you need
- high fidelity inheritance (copies resemble parents more than non-parents)
- competition for finite resources (differential reproduction)
- variation in traitsmessage board analogy?
(cultural artifacts are problematic because transmission is more horizontal than vertical. the next generation profits - but it is unclear that ones own offspring profits more than their age mates. while some apprentices are their parents genetic offspring most aren't.)
in order for there to be a tragedy of the commons there needs to be:
- a commons. a space. i think we can grant that message boards are a space / place in a sense.
- the space to be finite in some way. for there to be competition. with respect to either something that can be got out of the space (a resource) or with respect to ones representation in the space (like bacteria populating a fixed size petrie dish with unlimited food supply). like... having posts in the unarchived space? perhaps... having people respond to your posts? perhaps... what, exactly? this is interesting...- the possibility of getting more of the above in a way that stabotages the possibility? liklihood? of others getting that. and... of yourself getting that (over the longer term)
i suspect... too many posts seeking support and not enough posts offering it could do that. that was actually what drew me to the site (along with all the other checks of no spam, no advertising, text / literacy based)... the intelligent, articulate, caring responses that people were getting from others.
how there certainly did seem to be norms of reciprocity on these boards. thoughtful responses to particular individuals - then you were in fact more likely to receive back in kind.
a lot of other message boards you can put a lot of time and energy into thoughtful responses to particular individuals - and not even get any acknowledgement back. or get dismissive acknowledgement.
seems to me.
hmm.
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1047868
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20130914/msgs/1051040.html