On 12/9/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">The Avantguardian</b> <<a href="mailto:avantguardian2020@yahoo.com">avantguardian2020@yahoo.com</a>> wrote:<div><span class="gmail_quote"></span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
A rational player is defined as a player who makes<br>moves to raise ones score and draw closer to winning<br>the game. To make moves intent on lowering ones score<br>and losing the game is thereby irrational, UNLESS the<br>
game is a subgame of larger game and in the larger<br>game one can raise ones "score" by "losing" the<br>subgame.</blockquote><div><br>Which in turn can be taken as an alternative wording of Jef Allbright's perspective in terms of increasing scope (if I understand him correctly).
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">I see no other "larger game" for the deathists except<br>for the imaginary one where Allah or Gaia pat them on
<br>the head after they die.</blockquote><div><br>Yep. </div></div>